Thorsten <quintf...@googlemail.com> writes: >> Too bad you didn't give any concrete examples. > > The problem can be described easily: > > problem-specific helper-funcions (some redundancy avoided) > ,----------------------------------------------------------- > | (defun main-function (args) > | (let ((var (assoc :key1 args))) ; extracting var once > | ... > | (helper-function1 ...) ; inside let using var > | (helper-function2 ...) ; inside let using var > | )) > | > | (defun helper-function1 () > | ... > | ) > | > | (defun helper-function2 () > | ... > | ) > `----------------------------------------------------------- > > vs > > standalone helper-functions (but redundancy) > ,------------------------------------------------------------- > | (defun main-function (args) > | (let ((value (assoc :key1 args)) ; extracting var 1st time > | ... > | ) > | (helper-function1 ...) ; outside let > | (helper-function2 ...) ; outside let > | ) > | > | (defun helper-function1 (args) > | (let ((var (assoc :key1 args))) ; extracting var 2nd time > | ... > | )) > | > | (defun helper-function2 (args) > | (let ((var (assoc :key1 args))) ; extracting var 3rd time > | ... > | )) > `-------------------------------------------------------------
That's still very vague. If `args' is some structure that has some meaning and its parts belong together, say, an org entry, then it makes sense to have the helper functions defined on that structure in order to provide a consistent interface throughout the library. And I wouldn't tell multiple similar let-bindings duplicate code. But again, that's only my very abstract point of view. Given a concrete example, my opinion might be completely upside-down. ;-) Bye, Tassilo
