From ... From: Erik Naggum Subject: Re: "Wrong" results from _Common LISPcraft_ scope example Date: 1998/09/27 Message-ID: <3115877644197036@naggum.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 395277980 References: <3115842049861794@naggum.no> mail-copies-to: never Organization: Naggum Software; +47 8800 8879; http://www.naggum.no Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp * Erik Naggum | the reasonable behavior is to assume that a variable that is not closed | over lexically has a special binding. * joswig@lavielle.com (Rainer Joswig) | I would rather not assume that. It would introduce unnecessary errors in | interactive use. Implementations like ACL, LW, MCL, Genera are doing it | "right". AFAIK, only CMU CL is different. CMUCL does not _assume_ that, it actively goes ahead and declares it special. to me, that is a hell of a difference. when is it legitimate, then, to _assume_ special bindings for undeclared variables? I thought it would be sufficiently clear that it would be under evaluation and compilation. when else would it be meaningful to discuss this? i.e., SUM in SUM-AVERAGE is assumed to have special binding. what else would it be when it is not closed over lexically? suggestions? #:Erik