Yes.
On 7 Dec 2010, at 19:36, Peter Seibel wrote:
You mean PCL the CLOS implementation, right?
-Peter
On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 10:20 AM, Pascal Costanza pc@p-cos.net wrote:
On 3 Dec 2010, at 13:34, Martin Simmons wrote:
I think it is confusing to use (values) for that purpose, because "no values" is also a valid return value (e.g. for reader macro functions http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Body/02_add.htm).
I would make it a macro, called something like void.
OTOH, use of (values) or (void) will prevent tail call optimization, so may be undesirable.
I think this is the strongest argument in this thread: Most other arguments seem to point out only subjective and/or stylistic issues, while this one is a hard technical difference. Preventing tail call optimizations for stylistic issues is a bad idea, IMHO.
I have occasionally used the (values) idiom, but only in test situations, when I don't like seeing return values in the REPL. I seem to recall some uses of (values) in PCL.
Pascal
-- Pascal Costanza, mailto:pc@p-cos.net, http://p-cos.net Vrije Universiteit Brussel Software Languages Lab Pleinlaan 2, B-1050 Brussel, Belgium
pro mailing list pro@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro
-- Peter Seibel http://www.codequarterly.com/