"rgb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Now that I've slept, maybe I'll understand. Can we try again > > Stefan Monnier wrote: >> > If symbols created by let refer to an abstract concept then you're >> >> `let' does not create symbols. > > Ok, semantic error. From the point of view of a program the > symbol is being created and destroyed but actually it must > just be getting interned and uninterned.
Uh, no. > I don't know of a way to tell the difference but I can't think of a > reason I'd need to know other than to use the correct term here. > > So if I conceed it isn't being `created' and you replace my > erroneous use of create with intern does it make any difference? > If not, what explains this? > > (defun test () > (let (foo) > (put 'foo 'hold "this ") > (symbol-plist 'foo))) > => test > > (unintern "foo") > => t > > (symbol-plist 'foo) > => nil > > (test) > => (hold "this ") > > (symbol-plist 'foo) > => nil > > The lifetime of the plist is obviously limited. Nonsense. How would you explain this then: (defun test () (let (foo) (put 'foo 'hold "this ") (setq woozle 'foo) (symbol-plist 'foo))) => test (unintern "foo") => t (symbol-plist 'foo) => nil (test) => (hold "this ") (symbol-plist 'foo) => nil (symbol-plist woozle) => (hold "this ") The symbol is obviously still there. It only is no longer associated with the same name. But as long as you took a snapshot of the symbol before it became anonymous (that's what woozle does), you can still refer to that snapshot, even though the symbol itself has no longer an accessible name. It does have a print name, though: woozle => foo Note that woozle is no longer the same as 'foo, since the association of the symbol stored in woozle with the default obarray does no longer exist. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ Help-gnu-emacs mailing list Help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gnu-emacs