< two different macros in order not to cause issues with a special variable when working with Parenscript from different sources >
It sounds like you're talking about something important, but I'd need to see an example in order to get it. However, I'd like an answer to the first question first - does anybody actually need this? - because if not, then maybe the original let can be restored (either by removing or renaming the new one).
Another point: the new let generates different code for variables defined with "defvar" than "var". If the intention is to create Lispy bindings for special variables (indicated by "defvar") then an alternative solution would be to generate fancy code only for variables declared this way, and return to generating plain-old-JS for variables not declared this way. That might be a simple way to get the best of both worlds.
Daniel
On Sat, Aug 9, 2008 at 4:29 PM, Red Daly reddaly@gmail.com wrote:
I have only limited input here.
On Sat, Aug 9, 2008 at 1:23 PM, Daniel Gackle danielgackle@gmail.com wrote:
My questions are: [...] (2) If it really is needed, can we come up with an easy way to offer the user their choice of assignment semantics (perhaps a special variable)?
I would much prefer two different macros in order not to cause issues with a special variable when working with Parenscript from different sources.
Daniel
Red _______________________________________________ parenscript-devel mailing list parenscript-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/parenscript-devel