This works as you wrote it
Code: Select all
> (exec {(newlisp -e "(+ 3 4)")})
("7")
>
Code: Select all
> (exec {newlisp -e "(+ 3 4)"})
("7")
>
Code: Select all
> (exec "newlisp -e \"(+ 3 4)\"")
("7")
>
Code: Select all
> (exec {(newlisp -e "(+ 3 4)")})
("7")
>
Code: Select all
> (exec {newlisp -e "(+ 3 4)"})
("7")
>
Code: Select all
> (exec "newlisp -e \"(+ 3 4)\"")
("7")
>
Are you saying that you want (inc) to be pointing to a variable such as 'inc-value that will be incremented by 1 (integer only) with every call of (inc) ? In other words, it would be doing this behind the scenes:newdep wrote:... I think the manual needs an addon..
when using 'inc excluding place and num
'inc will increase by itself. like in (inc)
Code: Select all
(inc 'inc-value)
Fools... Don't they know they must fear Haskell as the true heir to the advanced purely functional programming language crown? ;)m i c h a e l wrote:They do this so often, I’m beginning to believe they like the smell of their own bullshit. They produce so much of it ;-)
m i c h a e l
As I recall, they like to remind those that question the CL dogma that they have a "Standard". While standards usually have a positive aspect, it seems to me that the standard bearers are so afraid of breaking any existing code that their community cannot (will not?) modernize the standard. Hence, the standard they so proudly defend is probably their greatest impediment to progressxytroxon wrote: Maybe someone could write a post explaining how modernizing the antiquated...