This is the mail archive of the guile@cygnus.com mailing list for the guile project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: setf.scm

Graham Hughes <ghughes@cs.ucsb.edu> writes:

> So a static setf would certainly be *useful*.  The question is really
> whether a dynamic one would be more useful/pure, and this really
> hinges on what you think setf is.  If you think it's a glorified
> naming convention, then a dynamic setf seems particularly useless.  If
> you think it's more like Dylan's setters, then obviously you want
> something else and it's questionable whether you would want a (setf!)
> form at all for them.

Thanks for summarizing the CL view; you did it better than I was able.
Personally I view setf as a programmer convenience, an enforced
consistent naming scheme.  In practice, I find it a pleasure to use,
and I wish Scheme had it, or that it was a standard add-on.

-russ


--
"Given two unrelated technical terms, an Internet search engine will
retrieve only resumes." 
             -- Schachter's Hypothesis