From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Bruce Korb Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: illegal uses of define in guile Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 06:58:10 -0700 Sender: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <3DAC1EF2.F3640152@pacbell.net> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1034690527 22615 80.91.224.249 (15 Oct 2002 14:02:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 14:02:07 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Neil Jerram , guile-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 181SGq-0005sY-00 for ; Tue, 15 Oct 2002 16:02:04 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 181SE5-0003fw-00; Tue, 15 Oct 2002 09:59:13 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 181SDD-0001r4-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Oct 2002 09:58:19 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 181SDA-0001gz-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Oct 2002 09:58:18 -0400 Original-Received: from bay-bridge.veritas.com ([143.127.3.10] helo=mtvmime03.VERITAS.COM) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 181SD9-0001bh-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Oct 2002 09:58:15 -0400 Original-Received: from megami (unverified) by mtvmime03.VERITAS.COM (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.10) with SMTP id ; Tue, 15 Oct 2002 06:58:13 -0700 Original-Received: from pacbell.net(ellen.veritas.com[10.180.88.137]) (1875 bytes) by megami via sendmail with P:esmtp/R:smart_host/T:smtp (sender: ) id for ; Tue, 15 Oct 2002 06:58:13 -0700 (PDT) (Smail-3.2.0.101 1997-Dec-17 #15 built 2001-Aug-30) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.8 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en Original-To: Dirk Herrmann Errors-To: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:1560 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:1560 Dirk Herrmann wrote: > > (if (some-sort-of-context-test) > > (begin > > (define mumble ....) > > ... > > ) ) > > > > 'cuz that's where I'd really have my problem. :-( > > I wonder what people's objective is when they use these constructs? My guess is that you are thinking about a program written entirely in Scheme. In my context, I have a list of things that need doing, among them defining a scheme value that may even be derived from non-scheme information. Later on, I'll test ``(some-sort-of-context-test)'' or, even, whether or not "mumble" got defined in order to decide about what to do. This "later on" occurrs in a completely different part of my program. Remember, this all gets embedded in the context of an encompassing program. > Do > you really want to construct two different top-level environments, where > once the symbol has a definition and once it has not? Are you (mis)using > the definedness of a symbol as a means to communicate boolean values? Sometimes. Not usually, though, but given that the function (defined? ...) exists, I've used it to decide program flow. _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel