Re: Canonical Way to Mask SETF?

Kent M Pitman <pitman@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> The reason this works for you is not that you're using (defun (setf...) ...)
> but that the argument you are passing contains an adequate pointer to reliably
> update the object.

Thanks. I see the distinction now, I think, and my head doesn't even
hurt yet. :)

....Peder...
--
This must be Thursday. I never could get the hang of Thursdays.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Lisp Question
    ... Kent M Pitman wrote: ... I think they use us a lot to teach recursion, ... So lists are mostly what they teach, and then not well, and people come away ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: When do compiler-macros run?
    ... Kent M Pitman writes: ... > was a novice or an expert. ... Fair nuff. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: How to xor?
    ... > Kent M Pitman wrote: ... > Intriguing possibility: Is it necessarily the wrong thing for that to ... others' existing code by an incompatible definition ... ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: The origins of CL conditions system
    ... Kent M Pitman wrote: ... redesign the way in which it presented the initial set of options to ... restart handlers that only make sense to be called ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: how do i clone in CLOS?
    ... Kent M Pitman wrote: ... (defun copy-instance (i) ... Just killing time till AI comes on. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)