[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Should let symbols be interned?
From: |
Miles Bader |
Subject: |
Re: Should let symbols be interned? |
Date: |
Mon, 22 Jan 2007 19:55:29 +0900 |
"Lennart Borgman (gmail)" <address@hidden> writes:
>> (let ((#1=#:my-uninterned-var 5))
>> (+ #1# 3))
>
> Thanks. I have never seent that syntax. I guess it is "unofficial"?
I'm not really sure what you mean; it's real reader syntax, and it's
perfectly fine to use it... It will also be output by the lisp printer
if `print-gensym' is non-nil. See `(elisp)Output Variables' and
`(elisp)Circular Objects' in the info manual.
Basically #:SYMBOL is read like SYMBOL, except that it's not interned.
So a further occurance of #:SYMBOL will be a _different_ symbol.
> When is my-uninterned-var used in the elisp code? Only in the #:?
The #1# is actually #:my-uninterned-var (the same one as before, not a
different one with the same name).
It uses the "reference" feature of the reader, which allows you to
specify multiple references to the same lisp object in a form read by
the reader. Here #N=FORM (where N is an integer) is read just like
FORM, except that it also associates N with FORM. #N# is then read as
the same FORM which was read earlier. This is useful for
printing/reading circular data structures (so the variable
`print-circle' enables printing of it), but it's also good for reading
multiple references to uninterned symbols.
-Miles
--
[|nurgle|] ddt- demonic? so quake will have an evil kinda setting? one that
will make every christian in the world foamm at the mouth?
[iddt] nurg, that's the goal
- Re: Should let symbols be interned?, (continued)
- Re: Should let symbols be interned?, Lennart Borgman (gmail), 2007/01/21
- Re: Should let symbols be interned?, Juanma Barranquero, 2007/01/21
- Re: Should let symbols be interned?, Lennart Borgman (gmail), 2007/01/21
- Re: Should let symbols be interned?, Juanma Barranquero, 2007/01/21
- Re: Should let symbols be interned?, Lennart Borgman (gmail), 2007/01/21
- Re: Should let symbols be interned?, Juanma Barranquero, 2007/01/22
- Re: Should let symbols be interned?, Eli Zaretskii, 2007/01/21
- Re: Should let symbols be interned?, Lennart Borgman (gmail), 2007/01/22
- Re: Should let symbols be interned?, Miles Bader, 2007/01/21
- Re: Should let symbols be interned?, Lennart Borgman (gmail), 2007/01/22
- Re: Should let symbols be interned?,
Miles Bader <=
- Re: Should let symbols be interned?, Lennart Borgman (gmail), 2007/01/22
- Re: Should let symbols be interned?, Miles Bader, 2007/01/22
- Re: Should let symbols be interned?, Eli Zaretskii, 2007/01/22
- Re: Should let symbols be interned?, Stefan Monnier, 2007/01/21
- Re: Should let symbols be interned?, Lennart Borgman (gmail), 2007/01/22
- Re: Should let symbols be interned?, Stefan Monnier, 2007/01/22