The Lisp FAQ states, in part:
Don't use the &AUX lambda-list keyword. It is always clearer
to define local variables using LET or LET*.
Are there other uses for the &AUX keyword?
--
Matthew X. Economou <········@irtnog.org> - Unsafe at any clock speed!
I'm proud of my Northern Tibetian heritage! (http://www.subgenius.com)
"a site cannot run on sperm alone" -- rusty in
http://www.kuro5hin.org/?op=comments&sid=2001/1/17/18922/1851&cid=104#104
From: Joe Marshall
Subject: Re: Uses of &AUX other than defining local variables?
Date:
Message-ID: <smz65g5i.fsf@ccs.neu.edu>
"Matthew X. Economou" <···············@irtnog.org> writes:
> The Lisp FAQ states, in part:
>
> Don't use the &AUX lambda-list keyword. It is always clearer
> to define local variables using LET or LET*.
>
> Are there other uses for the &AUX keyword?
Yes. In DEFSTRUCT constructor argument lists.
From: Vassil Nikolov
Subject: Re: Uses of &AUX other than defining local variables?
Date:
Message-ID: <uelaocgs9.fsf@poboxes.com>
On 16 Oct 2002 14:51:38 -0400, "Matthew X. Economou" <···············@irtnog.org> said:
MXE> The Lisp FAQ states, in part:
Don't use the &AUX lambda-list keyword. It is always clearer
to define local variables using LET or LET*.
MXE> Are there other uses for the &AUX keyword?
It may be useful to the implementor of a code generator.
It may be useful if changing code and a minimal delta is desirable.
(If a whole new LET form needs to be inserted, the lines in the
body will all increase their indentation, so the diff to the
previous version will show more differences than necessary, making
it harder to spot what actually changed. (Obviously, I do not like
to tell diff to ignore whitespace.)) I guess this may be
far-fetched, but I actually prefer minimal deltas, especially when
just fixing deployed code.
---Vassil.
--
Non-googlable is googlable.