Re: sLisp

[Thiago F.G. A. <tf...@za...>]

On 25/09/01 09:22:32, salvador wrote:

>"Thiago F.G. Albuquerque" wrote:
>
>> On 24/09/01 09:50:18, salvador wrote:
>>
>> >> let
>> >
>> >I think what you wrote is currently:
>> >(setv "str" (GetSelection))
>>
>> There is a difference: the variables created by 'let' are local. They only exist inside the 
let
>> expression. The variables created by setv are all global, right? I don't know, setv solves my
>> problem, but I think it would be nice to have local variables in the language too.
>
>Sure, but not a high priority thing ;-)

Yes, of course.

>> The alternatives are mutualy exclusive. If one of the tests succeed, it executes the
>> corresponding action and jumps out of the cond. It doesn't go trough any of the other tests.
>
>I think that's the same to use: (if (test1) (action1) (if (test2) (action2) (...)))
>Like in C: if (test1) {action1} else {if (test2) {action2} else {...}}

You're right. Thanks for pointing it out.

>> 1) defun
>
>What about it?

Nothing, it would be good to have it. Someone might need it in the future. But it's not high 
priority either.

Thiago