Subject: Re: binding multiple values (Ex: Re: some small proposed changes to standard) From: Erik Naggum <email@example.com> Date: 1999/07/25 Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> * Kent M Pitman <email@example.com> | Because of the prevalance of variables named things like INTEGER, etc. | this is probably not adequately good for error checking. The DO and | LET above might be typos for ill-formed lets that might not get caught. although I find the reasoning puzzling, using a keyword to specify type seems like a good idea to me because we might want to add other optional declarations, as in (let ((foo () :type list :dynamic-extent t)) ...) | Although there are other reasons why | | (let (((the integer i) ...)) ...) | | would be simplest. the symmetry with how it would be written in the absence of declarations is appealing, but although I favored this form myself previously, they "bury" the variables that are being bound in a lot of clutter, making it hard to locate what is being bound. if your reasoning above is valid, it appears to be more cause for concern for typos and problems with this approach than the one above. #:Erik -- suppose we blasted all politicians into space. would the SETI project find even one of them?