[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Issue COMPILE-ARGUMENT-PROBLEMS
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Issue COMPILE-ARGUMENT-PROBLEMS
- From: Kent M Pitman <KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Date: Tue, 3 Jan 89 04:01 EST
- Cc: CL-Compiler@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
- In-reply-to: <8901030603.AA05373@defun.utah.edu>
[Note corrected address. Don't send mail on this topic to CL-Cleanup.]
Nothing prohibits an interpreted-only implementation from defining
that COMPILED-FUNCTION-P returns true for all objects of type function,
in spite of their interpretedness. Compiled functions have no property
other than that they are the subset of functions which the compiler wants
to consistently treat as compiled.
I don't agree that semantic changes should be made by "editorial discretion".
If we are going to change the conditions under which something may or
must signal an error, however slightly, I think it must go through a
I will look back over my proposal and see what I think the difference is
between it and what was passed. I think there is more difference than
you suggest, but I'm susceptible to the idea that a smaller writeup might
suffice to accomodate the delta.