I've inadvertently pressed some send key combo again...

simple use of let is fine e.g.
(let X 3
   do what ever you want to do with X here without much change of hierachy
)

Ln doesn't fit this usage pattern and to "let" it be something at the top
seems somewhat artificial because there's an if statement deciding whether
to change it's supplied value or not.



On 31 January 2017 at 16:29, dean <deangwillia...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Oops acccidentally sent before I finished...Sorry!
>
> I was going to say the examples I've seen tend to be....
> (let X 3
>
>
>
>
>
>    (dm ln_completes> (Ln Ln_no)
>       (let (Ln Ln Res 0)
>          (if (gt0 (: first_ln_no))
>             (let Ln (pack " " Ln)))
>          (if (<> (: new_buf) NIL)
>             (=: buf (: new_buf))
>             (=: buf (: hdngs)))
>          (if (member Ln (: buf))
>             (prog
>                (if (gt0 (: first_ln_no))
>                   (let Res (: first_ln_no))
>                   (let Res Ln_no))
>                (reset> This)
>                (let Res Res))
>             (prog #not a member
>                (=: new_buf (fltr_mtchng_hdng_rmndrs Ln))
>                (if (<> (: new_buf) NIL)
>                   (if (=0 (: first_ln_no))
>                      (=: first_ln_no Ln_no))
>                   (reset> This))
>                (let Res 0)))))
>
> On 31 January 2017 at 16:27, dean <deangwillia...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Each one of the "let"s in the following method WAS a setq. All I did was
>> wrap the existing body with parens and assign Ln and Res with "let" but it
>> doesn't work. The examples I've seen tend to be like this...
>> (let X 3
>>
>> )
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> )
>>
>>
>> On 30 January 2017 at 16:19, dean <deangwillia...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Alex
>>> Yes that worked great preceded by a test....i.e. whizzing through all
>>> file lines in the input file until almost the 4000th which triggered
>>> reporting on the method of interests's input and output. Thank you very
>>> much for the advice.
>>> Best Regards
>>> Dean
>>>
>>> On 30 January 2017 at 11:07, Alexander Burger <a...@software-lab.de>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Dean,
>>>>
>>>> > trace operates in debug mode but again am not exactly sure how to
>>>> ensure
>>>> > that I am in debug mode on a method (rather than a function which is
>>>> just
>>>> > (debug 'Fn) at that point.
>>>> > I have tried but get can't trace.
>>>>
>>>> While (trace 'foo) traces a function, (trace 'meth> '+Class) traces a
>>>> method.
>>>>
>>>> ♪♫ Alex
>>>> --
>>>> UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Reply via email to