On Sep 2, 2006, at 5:28 PM, Rick DeNatale wrote:

> On 9/1/06, Robert Klemme <shortcutter / googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> <disclaimer>No LISP guru here</disclaimer>
>>
>> I probably confused lambdas with normal functions:
>>
>> [1]> (setq f1 (lambda (x) (+ x x)))
>> #<FUNCTION :LAMBDA (X) (+ X X)>
>> [2]> (funcall f1 10)
>> 20
>> [3]> f1
>> #<FUNCTION :LAMBDA (X) (+ X X)>
>>
>> So, for a lambda you can - but apparently for functions you  
>> can't.  Or
>> can you?
>
> I think that it just looks like the source here.  The print-name of a
> lambda can look pretty much like source code because the internal
> representation looks a lot like the source code. But it's not really
> the source code.
>
Note that this is the same reason Ruby2Ruby doesn't give you the  
"source code". Of course the OP probably doesn't really care if he  
gets the source code "character for character".

> -- 
> Rick DeNatale
>
> My blog on Ruby
> http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/
>
> IPMS/USA Region 12 Coordinator
> http://ipmsr12.denhaven2.com/
>
> Visit the Project Mercury Wiki Site
> http://www.mercuryspacecraft.com/
>