Issue COMPILER-DIAGNOSTICS, v7

[Kim A. Barrett <IIM@ECLA.USC.EDU>]

> Date: Tue, 03 Jan 89 12:53:55 EST
> From: Dan L. Pierson <pierson@mist.encore.com>
>
> ... you need to be able to collect all the things you'd like to turn off as
> subtypes of the same type. 

Use (OR ...)

> Date: Tue, 03 Jan 89 13:01:46 EST
> From: Dan L. Pierson <pierson@mist.encore.com>

> > The Lisp Machine has a thing called a notification. I might be
> > susceptible to calling the type a NOTIFICATION and making a function
> > called NOTIFY. Then, at least, there would be current practice behind
> > the idea.

> I have no objection to these name changes.

> I am mildly opposed to the competing proposal because it's redundant with
> mine.  I am strongly in favor of one general condition-based mechanism for
> all of these messages. 

I agree with Dan.  I much prefer the condition-based approach.  I much prefer
one general mechanism to spawning an infinite number of keyword arguments with
associated default special variables.  It's too bad it doesn't work in all
situations (like GC-MESSAGES), but that doesn't mean we shouldn't use it where
it will work.

kab
-------