[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: LFM + LFSP = LFE?
From: Bruce Lewis <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: LFM + LFSP = LFE?
Date: 17 Jun 2003 11:52:51 -0400
> [(brl-when (> growth 1) ]
> Congratulations! The stock you picked has grown a lot!
> You've made millions for the company. Remind us to give you a
I have noticed that you choose "brl-when" and not simply
"when". "when" would be surly more readable. Then I realized it is
Scheme, lisp1. You have to come up with more obscure identifier not to
introduce name collisions into existing code. Is that right?
Does that mean that Common Lisp's separate function namespace model
would have better maintainability and/or readability in such cases