From ... From: Erik Naggum Subject: Re: Implementational Portability (was: multiple-value binding let and let*) Date: 1999/08/23 Message-ID: <3144377424777287@naggum.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 516051513 References: <3143984828088049@naggum.no> <3144039684834581@naggum.no> <3144063865821902@naggum.no> <4672bvejd.fsf_-_@beta.franz.com> <44shvvdef.fsf@beta.franz.com> <37BD6A2B.3FCE9E1B@pindar.com> mail-copies-to: never Organization: Naggum Software; +47 8800 8879; +1 510 435 8604; http://www.naggum.no Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp * William Deakin | Although I accept the point about 'contact your vendor', these seem to me | to be subtle errors, (as highlighted by this thread), and who would you | know to do this? Only those who are sufficiently experienced or with | access to the ANSI standard (or is this to be a requirement of all cl | programmers?) I could see somebody as cack handed as myself getting | seriously burnt some day and spending alot of time recovering. a serious programmer who does not know what to expect from his compiler is a contradiction in terms. I don't think _any_ programmer who has not actually read and actually understood the specification of his language, or at least the parts thereof that he uses, should be allowed to write code for other people than himself unless it occurs under very close supervision by someone who does know the specification. of course, this is predicated on the desire to see programming as a professional discipline on par with law, medicine, auditing, etc, not the (continuation of) largely unskilled labor that happens to get paid to do any kind of non-quality work because the market is in desperate need of just about _anything_ to solve their mostly perceived problems or to keep going after making a seriously misguided decision about which software to invest in in the first place. #:Erik -- (defun pringles (chips) (loop (pop chips)))