From ...
From: Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.no>
Subject: Re: LET (was Avoiding unintentional variable capture)
Date: 1999/09/11
Message-ID: <3146071106171137@naggum.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 523875610
References: <37d6b784.46829757@judy> <37D7A8D8.DED7E340@pindar.com> <37d80efb.36196818@judy> <4n1zc7k8wk.fsf@rtp.ericsson.se> <37d907de.99911535@judy> <ey3r9k6ddpf.fsf@lostwithiel.tfeb.org> <37da57a7.185872109@judy>
mail-copies-to: never
X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.eunet.no
X-Trace: oslo-nntp.eunet.no 937082308 19522 193.71.66.49 (11 Sep 1999 20:38:28 GMT)
Organization: Naggum Software; +47 8800 8879; +1 510 435 8604; http://www.naggum.no
NNTP-Posting-Date: 11 Sep 1999 20:38:28 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp

* Reini Urban
| i really don't know if the expansion of LET* (into to nested lambdas) is
| a good thing or if it should be a special form instead, which can bind
| in sequence internally without having to call nested lambdas.

  I don't think we're in Scheme-land, anymore, Toto.

  LET* _is_ a special operator in Common Lisp.

#:Erik
-- 
  it's election time in Norway.  explains everything, doesn't it?