From: Tomas Zellerin <zellerin@gm...> - 2006-10-27 10:10:50
On 10/27/06, Yaroslav Kavenchuk <kavenchuk@...> wrote:
> Tomas Zellerin wrote:
> > On 10/27/06, Yaroslav Kavenchuk <kavenchuk@...> wrote:
> >> Tomas Zellerin wrote:
> >>> (let ((vars '(1 2 3 4)))
> >>> (loop for i from 0 to 10 for vars on vars do (print vars)))
> >> "for varS on varS"? May be you meant "for var on varS"?
> > No. This is the reason of the problem. And it would probably be for
> > var IN vars, then :)
> > See ironclad source sha1.lisp if you dont believe it is actually used.
> > Looks strange, but I dont see from CLSH why it should not be valid
> > code.
> You have specially answered only to me?
oops, my mistake, sorry . It should go to the list.
> tests on sbcl:
> * (loop for i from 0 to 10 for vars on vars do (print vars))
> (1 2 3 4)
> (2 3 4)
> (3 4)
> * (loop for i from 0 to 10 for vars in vars do (print vars))
Yes, I know it works on sbcl.
>you are the mailing list admin.
>you can approve or reject your own message.
I indeed did that, but it was not enough. It still received a bounce, =
The message's content type was not explicitly allowed
>is it a clisp patch?
No, a patch to Ironclad. But it'll only interest CLISP users. And only =
as long as its not yet incorporated.