Re: [Axiom-developer] clisp and sbcl

[Gabriel Dos Reis]

On Mon, 28 May 2007, Waldek Hebisch wrote:

| It looks for me that replacing SETQ by DEFPARAMETER defeats much of the
| purpose of DEFPARAMETER/DEFVAR: we silence _all_ warnings about assignments
| to undefined variables, loosing them also when variable name is
| spelled incorrectly.

The replacement was for variable definitions at top level, NOT every use
of SETQ.  All of those should have been DEFPARAMETERs in the first place.
If you see multiple SETQ at toplevel for the same variable, that is a 
logical bug, and is independent of whether you use SETQ or DEFPARAMTER.

I don't see why that defeats the purpose of DEFPARAMETER.

|  I would prefer to have in a _single_ place explicit
| DEFVAR/DEFPARAMETER declaration and in all other places use SETQ.

I don't think it makes much sense from logical code locality and organization
to put all definitions in one files as is done in setq.lisp or varini.boot.
Doing that put unrelated things together, remove the variable definition from
where it is logically confined to some unrelated place.

For example, you organize the current code base to make appearant the logical
units, then you'll find out that variables are defined in the wrong place.
Putting them with the codes they belong to is more logical.
$nopos, for example, should not be defined in varini.boot.  It belongs to
posit.boot. 

We don't have a file "call.boot" for all function calls we make, for
"eq-comparison.boot" for all "eq compare" we do.  Let's organize the codes
logically.

-- Gaby