Re: What should (ignore-errors (function foo)) do

In article <87mzbcxc8r.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Pascal Bourguignon <pjb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Ron Garret <rNOSPAMon@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Consider:

(defun foo () 1)
(defun baz () (funcall (function foo)))
(defun foo () 2)
(baz)

AFAIK all CL implementations will return 1, but I don't think you can
actually justify this in terms of the spec.

You mean 2, I assume. (both clisp and sbcl return 2).

Yes. See my response to Pascal for further elaboration.

rg
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: What should (ignore-errors (function foo)) do
    ... (defun foo () ... AFAIK all CL implementations will return 1, but I don't think you can ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: (read-from-string "#.(values) 42")
    ... Pascal Bourguignon wrote: ... object represented by foo." ... But that implication assumes that foo always evaluates to one and only ... implementations raised an error in such a case? ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Running Standalone Lisp Programs
    ... Pascal Bourguignon writes: ... >> It sounds like we have a fundamental disagreement about what these ... >> they are widely available across many implementations, ... (I'we also lost interest.) ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Read-syntax for RANDOM-STATE?
    ... Pascal Bourguignon writes: ... And some implementations, such as SBCL, do ... Lisp is the red pill. ... -- John Fraser, comp.lang.lisp ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: LISP
    ... On 12 maio, 15:18, pit...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: ... will not cons anything in most implementations. ... > (defun foo () ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)