Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.lisp > #61712
| From | Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.lisp |
| Subject | Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) |
| Date | 2026-10-06 23:31 +0000 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <20261006161806.28@kylheku.com> (permalink) |
| References | (18 earlier) <jwveceqwtg2.fsf-monnier+comp.lang.lisp@gnu.org> <118kcc1$1mri1$2@dont-email.me> <87wlrvendh.fsf@gmail.com> <20261005164228.546@kylheku.com> <11a1vuu$1kr4r$1@dont-email.me> |
On 2026-10-06, tfb <tfb@work.it.out> wrote: > Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> wrote: > >> >> (let ((foobar 3)) >> (setq fubar 42)) ; clobbered caller's private fubar >> > > Languages which conflate binding and assignment (I name no names) have a > variant of this problem, even with lexical scope. I am sure there are > languages which do that *and* have dynamic scope. Maybe, Bash, sorta. It has dynamic scope. Though "local var=..." is binding, additional occurrences of it in the same function are assignment, which we may legitimately call out as conflation. The documentation for local says that it creates a new variable, but I can't think of a way in which thqt claim is testable. Without lexical capture, we cannot tell the difference between mutating an environment by replacing a binding, or replacing the value part of an existing binding: both look like assignment. If we could to this: local x=42 local f=$(lambda echo $x) local x=$((x + 1)) and observe the 42 value by calling the lambda, then we would have to admit that local is doing shadowing binding. Without lambda (or at least something weaker, like being able to obtain the value address of a variable), we can't distinguish shadowing binding from clobbering. -- TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca
Back to comp.lang.lisp | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Malicious Computer Architecture (was: Re: Prioritize Performance over Correctness) Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-03 19:23 +0800
Re: Malicious Computer Architecture (was: Re: Prioritize Performance over Correctness) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-08-03 14:29 +0000
Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Kragen Javier Sitaker <kragen@canonical.org> - 2026-09-03 14:26 -0300
Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...] (Was: Malicious Computer Architecture) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-03 18:10 +0200
But how can you deploy. when its ROM? (Was: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-03 18:15 +0200
GPU Elasticity: Collective Communications Libraries (Was: But how can you deploy. when its ROM?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-07 14:37 +0200
What are Flits and Phits? [Network on a Chip] (Re: GPU Elasticity: Collective Communications Libraries) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-07 18:07 +0200
Cristallina: Thank you for the Beam (Re: What are Flits and Phits? [Network on a Chip]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-09 21:22 +0200
Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-18 16:26 +0200
How to shoot yourself in the foot (Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-18 16:50 +0200
Re: How to shoot yourself in the foot (Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-19 03:24 +0800
Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-19 03:21 +0800
Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> - 2026-08-18 21:13 +0100
Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-08-18 22:49 +0000
Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-19 08:32 +0800
Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Anthk GM <anthk@disroot.org> - 2026-09-15 17:10 +0000
Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-15 18:08 +0000
You hear some noises in the distance (Was: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-09-15 20:21 +0200
Re: You hear some noises in the distance (Was: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog?) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-15 20:05 +0000
Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2026-08-21 02:08 -0400
Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-21 15:25 +0800
Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2026-08-21 16:28 -0400
Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-19 08:27 +0800
William A. Howard solved all his 99 problems (Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-23 01:48 +0200
The Mac Neo is a Budget Monster [GPU Channels] (Re: What are Flits and Phits? [Network on a Chip]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-11 16:27 +0200
The luminaries of duct-tape engineering [Sweeney and Torvald] (Was: The Mac Neo is a Budget Monster [GPU Channels]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-11 16:51 +0200
Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> - 2026-08-03 19:51 +0100
Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-05 00:22 +0800
Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2026-08-04 19:10 +0100
Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-08-06 21:55 +0000
Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-07 06:31 +0800
Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> - 2026-08-06 23:01 +0100
Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-07 06:45 +0800
Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Niocláisín Cóilín de Ghlostéir <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-08-04 18:13 +0000
Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-05 03:48 +0800
Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Niocláisín Cóilín de Ghlostéir <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-08-04 22:01 +0000
Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-05 06:25 +0800
GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Kragen Javier Sitaker <kragen@canonical.org> - 2026-09-03 14:37 -0300
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Madhu <enometh@meer.net> - 2026-09-04 08:36 +0530
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Kragen Javier Sitaker <kragen@canonical.org> - 2026-09-15 12:19 -0300
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Madhu <enometh@meer.net> - 2026-09-17 12:17 +0530
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-17 21:12 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-09-18 09:59 -0400
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-18 22:00 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-09-18 10:12 -0400
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-18 22:01 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) steve g <Sgonedes1977@gmail.com> - 2026-10-05 19:30 -0400
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-10-05 23:50 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) tfb <tfb@work.it.out> - 2026-10-06 05:11 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-10-06 23:31 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-10-06 08:34 -0400
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-06 20:51 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-06 23:48 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions tfb <tfb@work.it.out> - 2026-10-07 07:56 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> - 2026-10-06 08:30 +0100
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions tfb <tfb@work.it.out> - 2026-10-06 17:39 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> - 2026-09-19 14:47 +0100
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-19 21:58 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> - 2026-09-19 23:24 +0100
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2026-09-19 17:23 -0700
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-09-20 03:05 -0400
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-09-22 18:20 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> - 2026-09-20 22:20 +0100
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2026-09-20 16:18 -0700
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-09-21 12:56 -0400
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Madhu <enometh@meer.net> - 2026-09-22 12:22 +0530
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2026-09-22 10:15 -0700
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Madhu <enometh@meer.net> - 2026-09-23 07:33 +0530
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> - 2026-09-23 07:22 +0100
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2026-09-24 03:06 -0700
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2026-09-26 04:45 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Madhu <enometh@meer.net> - 2026-09-27 16:24 +0530
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2026-09-27 15:02 -0700
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Madhu <enometh@meer.net> - 2026-09-28 10:53 +0530
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions steve g <Sgonedes1977@gmail.com> - 2026-10-05 19:47 -0400
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Anton Antimo <anton@safunu.org> - 2026-09-24 10:25 -0300
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions steve g <Sgonedes1977@gmail.com> - 2026-10-05 19:49 -0400
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2026-09-23 13:59 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-09-22 18:22 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions tfb <tfb@work.it.out> - 2026-09-24 20:01 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-09-24 20:55 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions steve g <Sgonedes1977@gmail.com> - 2026-10-05 19:41 -0400
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-21 00:18 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-09-21 19:06 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-22 00:42 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-09-22 18:26 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-09-25 21:54 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions steve g <Sgonedes1977@gmail.com> - 2026-10-05 20:13 -0400
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Anton Antimo <anton@safunu.org> - 2026-10-06 15:14 -0300
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-09-22 17:51 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-09-22 18:02 +0000
A Case for Impurity: The Applied Pi Calculus (Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-04 14:58 +0200
The Sandcastle of Paul Taraus Interactors (Re: A Case for Impurity: The Applied Pi Calculus) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-04 15:10 +0200
csiph-web