From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dirk Herrmann Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: illegal uses of define in guile Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 08:15:17 +0200 (CEST) Sender: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <3DAB5ED4.D4C95AFD@pacbell.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1034662614 25805 80.91.224.249 (15 Oct 2002 06:16:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 06:16:54 +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 181L0f-0006i3-00 for ; Tue, 15 Oct 2002 08:16:53 +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 181Kzw-0003h9-00; Tue, 15 Oct 2002 02:16:08 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 181KzJ-0002sx-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Oct 2002 02:15:29 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 181KzG-0002nr-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Oct 2002 02:15:28 -0400 Original-Received: from sallust.ida.ing.tu-bs.de ([134.169.132.52]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 181KzF-0002kl-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Oct 2002 02:15:26 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost (dirk@localhost) by sallust.ida.ing.tu-bs.de (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA29565; Tue, 15 Oct 2002 08:15:17 +0200 (CEST) Original-To: Bruce Korb In-Reply-To: <3DAB5ED4.D4C95AFD@pacbell.net> 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:1554 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:1554 On Mon, 14 Oct 2002, Bruce Korb wrote: > Neil Jerram wrote: > > > >> Currently, guile allows the following: > > >> (if (not (defined? '%load-verbosely)) > > >> (define %load-verbosely #f)) > > > > Bruce> I do that. > > > > I do too; however, I guess one could instead write this: > > > > (define %load-verbosely > > (if (defined? '%load-verbosely) > > %load-verbosely > > #f)) > > > > Would this work? > > Even if it worked in that example, it leaves open: > > (if (some-sort-of-context-test) > (begin > (define ....) > ... > ) ) > > 'cuz that's where I'd really have my problem. :-( I wonder what people's objective is when they use these constructs? 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? Do other scheme implementations allow this? Best regards Dirk Herrmann _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel