[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Dynamic binding, ballot (with better line breaks)



   From: pavel.parc@arisia.Xerox.COM
   Date: Wed, 6 Dec 89 10:27:45 -0800

   |--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------|
   |        |                                                                   |
   |        | I do not object to including a description of dynamic binding, as |
   |        | defined in the recent message to RRRS-Authors, in an appendix to  |
   |        | R4RS.                                                             |
   |        |                                                                   |
   |--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------|
   |        |                                                                   |
   |        | I do not object to including a description of dynamic binding,    |
   |        | similar to that in the recent message to RRRS-Authors, in an      |
   |   X    | appendix to R4RS as long as it reflects the changes I want.       |
   |        | A brief overview of my desired changes appears below this ballot. |
   |        |                                                                   |
   |--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------|
   |        |                                                                   |
   |        | I object to including a description of dynamic binding, similar   |
   |        | to that in the recent message to RRRS-Authors, in an appendix to  |
   |        | R4RS.                                                             |
   |        |                                                                   |
   |--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------|

   Additional comments:

I'm unhappy with the names; using "dynamic" as a noun in this context
rubs me the wrong way (in fact I think using "dynamic" as a noun in
-any- context is a little strange).  I think "dynamic-variable" is a
good name for this thing, despite the fact that it's unpopular.  You
at one point suggested "dynamic-identifier"; this also seems
reasonable to me, although you expressed some discomfort with it.

Whatever name is chosen, I think that the constructor and predicate
should contain it: e.g. `MAKE-DYNAMIC-IDENTIFIER' and
`DYNAMIC-IDENTIFIER?'.  I'm happy with the names of the other
procedures.