[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Symbol vs. Value Question
From: |
tomas |
Subject: |
Re: Symbol vs. Value Question |
Date: |
Sat, 20 Oct 2001 16:21:57 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.0.1i |
On Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 09:07:32AM -0600, Robert A. Uhl wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 07:42:33AM +0200, address@hidden wrote:
> >
> > Hmmm. It looks as if you are passing the symbols. Thus you get
> > the symbols. Try not quoting the list, i.e. say for example
> >
> > (trav-mapobject-set-owner (list planet asteroid))
>
> Yep--that's exactly what the problem was.
>
> > Note that in Lisp and its daughters there is more distance between
> > a symbol and its binding(s) than we mght be accustomed to :-)
>
> Well, I'd figured roughly what was going on. I'm supposing that the
> (list ...) method is more usual and appropriate than the '(...)
> method?
>
Well -- they are different things; '(...) gives you a list of symbols,
which *might* be bound to other useful things (the bindings depending
on the module). (list ...) gives you a list of the objects passed in
as parameters.
> That said, is there a good way in guile to grab the value of a symbol?
See the answer of Marius to your other post for that. It seems to be
something people far more capable than me like to avoid ;-)
> Like I said, I was reading source and header files late into the night
> and had no luck. But perhaps I was looking in the wrong direction.
>
That seems to be one of the hurdles of lispy languages. They have a very
strong culture and it takes a while for a foreigner to build up the right
``expectation set''.
Regards
-- tomas