[James Rice <Rice@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU>: Re: Compiler-Let]

[sandra%defun@cs.utah.edu (Sandra J Loosemore)]

**** Forwarded Message Follows ****
Received: by defun.utah.edu (5.54/utah-2.0-leaf)
	id AA05409; Mon, 26 Sep 88 14:24:01 MDT
Received: by cs.utah.edu (5.54/utah-2.0-cs)
	id AA26536; Mon, 26 Sep 88 14:23:52 MDT
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 88 13:18:22 PDT
 From: James Rice <Rice@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Compiler-Let
To: Sandra@cs
Message-Id: <12433711717.59.RICE@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU>


Hello,
I just thought I'd mention the only time that I've ever been
inclined to use Compiler-Let (I hate it), which was so as to
be able to get compile time evaluation of code during the
inlining of a subst.  For example:

(Defsubst dbg ()
 ;;; Make dbg like it is on Symbolics.
  (compiler-let ((*dummy-I-don't-really-use-this*
		    (compiler:warn .....)))
	(cerror "Proceed from breakpoint" "Debugger breakpoint")))

Horrible isn't it?
Anyway, I con't help thinking that some sort of mechanism for
the compile-time evaluation of code which is being substed/inlined
is a good idea.  Maybe the cleanups for Eval-When will give us
non-top-level evaluation.  I haven't been tracking that issue.

Hope this was of some use,


Rice.
-------

**** End of Forwarded Message ****
-------