Subject: Re: scheme seems neater
From: rpw3@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock)
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 06:33:57 -0500
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Message-ID: <CfOdnS6lFIQ4-h_d4p2dnA@speakeasy.net>
Pascal Costanza  <costanza@web.de> wrote:
+---------------
| Anton van Straaten wrote:
| > Is there a list of the 24 somewhere?
| 
| (do-external-symbols (symbol 'common-lisp)
|    (when (special-operator-p symbol)
|      (print symbol)))
+---------------

(*sigh*) This will show what *ONE IMPLEMENTATION* chose to do,
not what the ANSI Standard specifies. As I've posted several times
recently, the relevant passages --  CLHS "3.1.2.1.2.1 Special Forms"
and CLHS "3.1.2.1.2.2 Macro Forms" -- give considerable latitude to
implementations to choose which are "really" special operators and
which are "just" macros.

And anyway, it's 25, not 24.  ;-}

+---------------
| I don't if this helps in this context, but there is also a paper by 
| Henry Baker about Common Lisp special operators at 
| http://home.pipeline.com/~hbaker1/MetaCircular.html
+---------------

While that's certainly an interesting paper (and perhaps even useful to
an implementor), it doesn't cover all of the special forms in the CLHS.


-Rob

-----
Rob Warnock			<rpw3@rpw3.org>
627 26th Avenue			<URL:http://rpw3.org/>
San Mateo, CA 94403		(650)572-2607