[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Date: Friday, 28 February 1986 14:56-EST
From: Jonathan A Rees <JAR at MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
To: JMiller at OZ.AI.MIT.EDU
cc: RRRS-AUTHORS at MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Re: named-lambda, etc
Why not NAMED-CONS, NAMED-VECTOR, NAMED-+, NAMED-READ-CHAR,
NAMED-CALL-WITH-CURRENT-CONTINUATION, NAMED-WITH-INPUT-FILE, etc.?
Come on, now. These objects have no good reason to have names
for themselves since they could use them in no way that I can see.
The case is obviously different for procedures.