[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Issue: LOAD-TIME-EVAL (Version 8)
- To: David A. Moon <Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Subject: Re: Issue: LOAD-TIME-EVAL (Version 8)
- From: email@example.com (Sandra J Loosemore)
- Date: Wed, 1 Feb 89 15:12:44 MST
- Cc: David N Gray <Gray@DSG.csc.ti.com>, Sandra J Loosemore <firstname.lastname@example.org>, KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, CL-Compiler@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
- In-reply-to: David A. Moon <Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>, Fri, 27 Jan 89 22:03 EST
I'd like to get this issue out of the way. To me it appears that we
have pretty much reached a consensus, and the remaining obstacle is
deciding upon some exact wording. Here is my suggestion for an
Remove the paragraph from proposal LOAD-TIME-EVAL:R**2-NEW-SPECIAL-FORM
that begins "Implementations must guarantee that each reference....".
Replace it with:
Within a single call to EVAL, COMPILE, or COMPILE-FILE,
implementations are permitted to coalesce EQ LOAD-TIME-VALUE
expressions (that is, lists of the form (LOAD-TIME-VALUE ...) that are
EQ) appearing textually within the code being processed. Since a
LOAD-TIME-VALUE expression may be referenced in more than one place,
users must use caution when destructively modifying the resulting
object, as there may be other references to the object.
If any of you have some alternate wording you'd prefer to see, or or
some additional changes to include in the amendment, I'll be happy to
entertain further suggestions (but please try to be specific).