Henry G. Baker
Thu, 15 May 1997 09:43:27 -0700 (PDT)
> Scott> I'm not arguing against the introduction of immutable things, but I=
> Scott> this was a cute hack.
> Scott> -- Scott
> But a dangerouse one, also.
> First, according to CLTL2, "it is an error to modify a string being
> used as the print name of a symbol". As a matter of fact, even CLTL
> says that "it is an extremely bad idea to modify a string being used
> as the print name of a symbol".
> If this is true, we aren't allowed to modify the result of
> symbol-name. Period. If you violate the rule, the consequences are up
> to you. I don't understand why symbol-name is forced to _always_ copy
> the string. It should never copy because it doesn't need to do that.
Well, if I am given a random string, I'd be hard put to identify it as
one which was produced as the result of symbol-name. Putting dire
warnings into language standards is a waste of hot air. If you want a
rule enforced, then enforce it -- e.g., type the string as
"The first thing we do, let's kill all the language-lawyers"
(apologies to Shakespeare)
www/ftp directory URL: