Re: Macros: Scheme vs Common Lisp

Rick> (setq bar 23) Rick> Of course, many consider this sloppy. CMUCL issues a warning at this Rick> point. And so it should. Thanks for pointing this out! Rick> What I want is: Rick> (setq 23) Rick> (defmacro foo () 'bar) Rick> (foo) => 23 Rick> (let ((bar 42)) (foo)) => 23 [note: CL actually yields 42] Rick> (setq bar 57) Rick> (foo) => 57 Rick> (let ((bar 42)) (foo)) => 57 [note: CL actually yields 42] Rick> For what it's worth, CMUCL gives the values that you want, assuming Rick> that you meant (setq bar 23) as the first form rather than (setq 23). But that's probably because CMUCL makes BAR special. CLisp doesn't. So you cannot rely on this behavior. -- Cheers =8-} Chipsy Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla