Subject: Re: setq x setf From: Erik Naggum <email@example.com> Date: 2000/06/15 Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> * email@example.com (Sashank Varma) | since SETF is a macro, it has to expand into an expression. | i assume that implementations ensure that this expansion is | pure ANSI CL; this may even be mandated in the standard. Why do you assume that? Why should it be mandated? | one way that i could be wrong is that it could be perfectly legal | for SETF to macroexpand into implementation-specific mechanisms for | modifying bindings, but this just seems wrong. Could you elaborate on why you think this way? #:Erik -- If this is not what you expected, please alter your expectations.