Wiki: Using 'edit'

Hi all, under "Documentation" in the wiki, I wrote an "In Detail" article about the 'edit' function: http://picolisp.com/5000/-2-1j.html [On Browsing the Database or Arbitrary Data Structures and Definitions] Hope it is useful :) Cheers, - Alex -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-la

difference between (let) and (bind)

Hi list, looking at the docs, looks like (bind) is just a fancy way of doing (let). is this correct? i tried looking at the source but i'm still trying to decipher it. also checked out wl.java. both (let) and (bind) are quite similar. is this so? /e -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab

Re: difference between (let) and (bind)

Hi Edwin, roughly speaking, bind is a function while let is a macro. They differ in argument evaluation. bind is programmable while let is more of a syntax thingy. Cheers, Tomas -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe

Re: Wiki: Using 'edit'

Hi Alex, > article about the 'edit' function: http://picolisp.com/5000/-2-1j.html brilliant, thank you! Now I just need to learn vi:-D Tomas -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe

Re: difference between (let) and (bind)

Hi Tomas, On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 1:27 AM, Tomas Hlavaty wrote: > Hi Edwin, > > roughly speaking, bind is a function while let is a macro.  They differ > in argument evaluation.  bind is programmable while let is more of a > syntax thingy. thank you for this. thinking about it a bit, i can just

Re: difference between (let) and (bind)

Hi Edwin, > thinking about it a bit, i can just do away with one and live with the > other? say, can i just live with (bind)? yes, but it is more convenient to write let in your programs instead of the bind with constructing the binding list manually. However, in certain situations, one needs a

Re: Wiki: Using 'edit'

Hi Alex, very interesting, helpfull - and comprehensible ;) Thanks Thorsten -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe

Re: difference between (let) and (bind)

On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 4:48 AM, Tomas Hlavaty wrote: > Hi Edwin, > >> thinking about it a bit, i can just do away with one and live with the >> other?  say, can i just live with (bind)? > > yes, but it is more convenient to write let in your programs instead of > the bind with constructing the bi

Re: pilog dcg with args

Hi Alex, Thank you so much - this seems to cover the wikipedia example I'll have to go back over the dcg in http://www.csupomona.edu/~jrfisher/www/prolog_tutorial/7_3.html with this latest pilog dcg and see how it works now. The terminals and non-terminals sometimes get mixed in the same

Re: pilog dcg with args

Hi Alex, Thanks for the picolisp pointers :-) The sub? shrinks down one of the awkward bits there. Unfortunately, I didn't see sub? in miniPicoLisp. The replace seems like a better idea than using the surgical patch there - probably not a good idea to modify a list passed in as an argument li

Re: Wiki: Using 'edit'

Hi Tomas, > > article about the 'edit' function: http://picolisp.com/5000/-2-1j.html > > brilliant, thank you! Now I just need to learn vi:-D .. or write an implementation for emacs :) -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe

Re: pilog dcg with args

Hi Doug, > Unfortunately, I didn't see sub? in miniPicoLisp. Oops, you are right! It is not implemented. The reason is that 'sub?' is nasty in miniPicoLisp, due to the extremely packed name representation of that implementation. It would require an "ugly" solution, e.g. unpacking both names into