[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


> > Is there a way to make COMPILER-LET work correctly short of requiring
> > that interpreters do a macroexpansion prepass?  Right now, I can't use
> > COMPILER-LET in portable code because some macroexpansions happen after
> > the dynamic extent of the COMPILER-LET bindings has ended.
> This issue once included a proposal called CLARIFY-STATUS-QUO, . . .

Here is an interesting test case for would-be implementations of
compiler-let or something resembling it:

(setq *f*
  (compiler-let ((*switch* t))
    #'(lambda (x) (my-macro))))
where my-macro's expansion depends on *switch*.