Re: Canonical Way to Mask SETF?
- From: Robert Uhl <eadmund42@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 13:55:21 -0600
Marco Gidde <marco.gidde@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> So I think in
>
> (defsetf menu-title (x) (title) `(setf (getf ,x :title) ,title))
>
> it looks as if we were setting X, but it's "only" a temporary bound to
> X's value.
That's what appears to be the problem from my POV; I replace the
interior with a PROGN containing PRINTs around the SETF, and X
definitely gets set to (:TITLE "foo"); it just doesn't effect the value
of the passed-in variable. That is, it acts like a function, with a new
binding for a variable.
--
Robert Uhl <http://public.xdi.org/=ruhl>
There is no place for nationalism in the Church. All are one in
Christ. --Blessed Martyr Philoumenos of Jacob's Well, +1979
.
- References:
- Canonical Way to Mask SETF?
- From: Robert Uhl
- Re: Canonical Way to Mask SETF?
- From: Kent M Pitman
- Re: Canonical Way to Mask SETF?
- From: Kent M Pitman
- Re: Canonical Way to Mask SETF?
- From: Marco Gidde
- Canonical Way to Mask SETF?
- Prev by Date: Re: ILC2005: McCarthy denounces Common Lisp, "Lisp", XML, and Rahul
- Next by Date: Re: Canonical Way to Mask SETF?
- Previous by thread: Re: Canonical Way to Mask SETF?
- Next by thread: Re: Canonical Way to Mask SETF?
- Index(es):