Hi,
I've been reading "ANSI Common Lisp" by Graham. In section 14.5
he advises against the use of the loop iteration macro since it is not
really well defined in the standard. In "Common Lisp the Language, 2ed",
there is discussion in the appendices of alternate high level iteration
approaches (series, generators, and gatherers), which were deemed "not yet
sufficiently mature or in sufficiently widespread use to warrant inclusion
in the draft Common Lisp standard at that time". I found no mention of
these in Graham, though a cursory reading of these appendices left me
thinking that these libraries looked quite useful.
So now I am wondering, what has the experience of the Lisp
community with these approaches (in appendices A and B of CLTL2) been like
compared to the complex "loop" form? Is Graham's advice on "loop"
uncontroversial? If so, why standardize it?
-- Brian
Sorry to follow up to my own post. I didn't realize that this question was
in bad taste for this newsgroup. My apologies. Please don't start a
flamewar. I'm seriously interested in reasonable opinions on this topic,
but I'd prefer e-mail.
Now if only I'd read that FAQ an hour earlier... :-)
-- Brian
In article <·······································@shellx.best.com>, Brian
Rogoff <···@best.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> I've been reading "ANSI Common Lisp" by Graham. In section 14.5
> he advises against the use of the loop iteration macro since it is not
> really well defined in the standard. In "Common Lisp the Language, 2ed",
> there is discussion in the appendices of alternate high level iteration
> approaches (series, generators, and gatherers), which were deemed "not yet
> sufficiently mature or in sufficiently widespread use to warrant inclusion
> in the draft Common Lisp standard at that time". I found no mention of
> these in Graham, though a cursory reading of these appendices left me
> thinking that these libraries looked quite useful.
>
> So now I am wondering, what has the experience of the Lisp
> community with these approaches (in appendices A and B of CLTL2) been like
> compared to the complex "loop" form? Is Graham's advice on "loop"
> uncontroversial? If so, why standardize it?
Personally, I find LOOP ugly, but usable. Once you understand
the basics, it is easy to use. I'm using because it is there
(most of the time).
A nicer (but not standard) alternative is the ITERATE macro.
--
http://www.lavielle.com/~joswig/