Subject: Re: setq x setf
From: Erik Naggum <>
Date: 2000/06/15
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Message-ID: <>

* (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?

  If this is not what you expected, please alter your expectations.