-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
A specific wording in MAKE-ARRAY
.
#53
Comments
Yeah, I wouldn't want to introduce new terminology, or rather to reuse "slot" to mean something other than a field in a structure or standard object. I'm not sure what wording would be better, though. "element" is already defined as "an object that is an element of the list or array that is the sequence" which is uh, a little recursive but still seems more appropriate than "slot". The issue here is that it's more the position in the array that's "uninitialized", rather than there being some kind of distinguished uninitialized object. Maybe just dropping "uninitialized" would be good...? |
Dropping "uninitialized" is a bit restrictive too, because the user may write elements to such an array before reading it. In that case, reading the place afterward should not be undefined. Actually, "slot" may not be a bad choice because its definition in the glossary doesn't restrict it to be used only in the context of standard objects:
|
Given the glossary definition, I think "slot" is good. I use it myself to talk about the CAR and the CDR |
Sure, hence I think the suggested edition in OP works.
|
CLHS: Function MAKE-ARRAY says
An element in the spec just means a lisp datum. It does not make sense to talk about whether an element is initialized or not. It is better, in my opinion, to instead say
But then we need to add a definition of a slot for an array somewhere else too.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: