Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: cyber_surfer@wildcard.demon.co.uk (Cyber Surfer)
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!demon!wildcard.demon.co.uk!cyber_surfer
Subject: Re: SETF (was Re: Why do people like C? (Was: Comparison: Beta - Lisp))
References: <Cy3E67.42K@rheged.dircon.co.uk> <Cy5Bv7.JDy@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> <JASON.94Nov2122036@wratting.harlqn.co.uk>
Organization: The Wildcard Killer Butterfly Breeding Ground
Reply-To: cyber_surfer@wildcard.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.27
Lines: 21
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 1994 11:26:33 +0000
Message-ID: <783861993snz@wildcard.demon.co.uk>
Sender: usenet@demon.co.uk

In article <JASON.94Nov2122036@wratting.harlqn.co.uk>
           jason@harlequin.co.uk "Jason Trenouth" writes:

> Remember, there is a prefix convention already:

<list deleted>

> but Scheme's ? and ! suffix conventions are probably better if CL were
> redesigned.

I agree about the list of CL functions, I just didn't mention them,
as that's a CL convention, not a Lisp convention. I like the Scheme
convention, as it reminds me the Forth conventions for similar ops.
"@" for access or dereferencing, "!" for storing or updating, "?"
for testing, "." for displaying, and others. The problem with CL's
"n" convention is that it isn't consistant. Instead of NREMOVE,
we have DELETE.

-- 
Please vote for moderation in comp.lang.visual
http://cyber.sfgate.com/examiner/people/surfer.html
