let

Started by eddier, October 29, 2004, 06:24:10 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

eddier

let
Would it be difficult to fix let so that I could reference other local variables like

(let (x (car L) y (car x) ...)

This would reduce the amount of nested lets like

(let (x (car L))
  (let (y (car x))
  ...


What do you think about this one?



Eddie

Lutz

#1
do you mean let* (or letrec) ?



(set 'x 10)



(let ((x 3) (y (+ x 4)) (print y)) => 14



versus:



(letrec ((x 3) (y (+ x 4)) (print y))  => 7



Lutz

eddier

#2
I would use the (letrec more.  What is the difference between let* and let?



Eddie

Lutz

#3
'let*' and 'letrec' are the same thing, they are just differently named in different LISPs. I implemented is yesterday as 'letr', I thought 'letrec' is too long to type for a function which will be used by some people quite often so 'letr' it will be in version  8.2.6



Lutz

eddier

#4
Thanks Lutz :)



Eddie

Qrczak

#5
Quote from: "Lutz"'let*' and 'letrec' are the same thing, they are just differently named in different LISPs.

Scheme has both let* and letrec, and they are not the same thing.



let* allows each expression to refer to variables defined above it. It guarantees that expressions will be evaluated in order. Common Lisp has the same let*.



letrec allows each expression to refer to any variable in the group, but all references must be made inside function closures - it must be possible to evaluate all expressions to values before binding any variable. Expressions may be evaluated in arbitrary order.

Lutz

#6
thanks for the clarification



Lutz