Does it solve any problem? According to the first footnote of PCL, if not a keyword it interns the symbol in the current package. As all keywords are interned in the keyword package it would prevent multiple symbols being interned in different packages. But are there any other advantages? What problems does it create? (I'm guessing there must be a problem as it is not the prevalent convention)
相关问题
- Drakma and Dexador both fails at USocket call whil
- Forming Lisp code to task — related to flatten lis
- clisp 2.49: asdf cannot find asd
- How can I create a Fluent NHibernate Convention th
- Lisp web tales: How to fix the blogdemo example (C
相关文章
- Does learning one Lisp help in learning the other?
- Common Lisp: Why does my tail-recursive function c
- How do I write a macro-defining macro in common li
- How can I unintern a qualified method?
- Changing the nth element of a list
- Is a “transparent” macrolet possible?
- comma-comma-at in Common Lisp
- Should EventHandler always be used for events?
In lisp-aware editors, keywords are highlighted. Using keywords in loop helps highlight the loop structure.
No, the only advantage is to not end up with extra symbols in whatever package your code is read in.
This isn't a problem in and of itself, but it is one of those things that make (some) elemens of automatic introspection more difficult. If you are careful to use keywords for LOOP "keywords", you can then easily identify the names of all your functions, variables and macros by simply looking at the symbols interned in the package.
Also from PCL:
(Peter Seibel, Practical Common Lisp, Chapter 7, Footnote 8.)