Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!hookup!news.moneng.mei.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!EU.net!uunet!sytex!smcl
From: smcl@sytex.com (Scott McLoughlin)
Subject: Re: Common Lisp' dual name space
Message-ID: <4y7yuc2w165w@sytex.com>
Sender: bbs@sytex.com
Organization: Sytex Access Ltd.
References: <38u0n4$9qb@tools.near.net>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 1994 21:02:38 GMT
Lines: 28

barmar@nic.near.net (Barry Margolin) writes:

> Note, however, that not all those namespaces are similar.  The variable,
> function, package, and plist namespaces map symbols to first-class objects.
> There are no first-class type (except for classes), block, or tag objects.

Howdy,
        I thought name spaces for variables/functions mapped symbols
to bindings or locations, not the values at those locations. Thus
where we have to say:
        (RETURN-FROM FOO 8)
We are provided with a short hand for saying:
        (VALUE-LOAD BAR)
namely:
        BAR
Of course, while the bindings aren't first class (probably
many types of bindings in a CL imp: registers, stack locations,
heap allocated SETQ'able lambda-bound lexical environments,
the VALUE slot of a symbol, etc.), the "value" in these
variable/function binding is first class. Nevertheless,
I still feel the issue is 1 vs. N, not 1 vs. 2.
        Anyway, I'm not a language theorist, so I might
be expressing this incorrectly.

=============================================
Scott McLoughlin
Conscious Computing
=============================================
