Subject: Re: newbie in deep over his head From: Erik Naggum <email@example.com> Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 13:12:05 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> * Erik Naggum > I think using #'(lambda ...) is a notational grossity. * Alain Picard | Why do you say that? Is that because you think (function (lambda ..)) | looks worse, or because that's what the (lambda ..) macro is there for? It is because I consider #' a notational grossity in general, but it is a _functional_ notational grossity. (Is "grossity" even a word? Hm, no, but it should have been, because of "curiosity".) (Also pardon the pun.) I think (function car) is notationally better than #'car, but I think 'car is notationally better than (quote car). Why? I have no idea. Some twisted sense of aesthetics or something, I guess, or maybe I am just used to ', maybe it is so small it is innocuous, whereas #' looks like Laurel and Hardy or something. Therefore, (function (lambda ...)) is better than #'(lambda ...), but since that is such a redundancy, I much prefer (lambda ...) by itself. | I'm curious, because I never thought of #'(lambda ..) as ugly. I just | get used to seeing that #' everywhere I expect a function argument. But that would obviously make it problematic to use a function that returns a function. I think of lambda as a function-constructor, whereas function is a function-getter. (function (lambda ...)) would therefore get at the function that lambda constructs. (Yes, I do know that it is function that makes the lambda form into a function.) Another function or look-alike that returns a function would be similarly unquoted. /// -- In a fight against something, the fight has value, victory has none. In a fight for something, the fight is a loss, victory merely relief.