[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Issue: EVAL-WHEN-NON-TOP-LEVEL (Version 5)
- To: Kent M Pitman <KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Subject: Re: Issue: EVAL-WHEN-NON-TOP-LEVEL (Version 5)
- From: sandra%defun@cs.utah.edu (Sandra J Loosemore)
- Date: Thu, 16 Feb 89 12:10:01 MST
- Cc: sandra%defun@cs.utah.edu, CL-Compiler@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
- In-reply-to: Kent M Pitman <KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>, Thu, 16 Feb 89 13:09 EST
Well, I was hoping the person who has made the most noise in the past
about the nesting behavior would speak up again in his own defense. :-)
Here's my own position on the issue, which you can quote me on if you
want.
In the processing situations that are controlled by EVAL and LOAD, the
absence of the situation from an outer EVAL-WHEN means that that
processing simply will not be performed on its body, regardless of
whether the body contains nested EVAL-WHENs which do specify the
appropriate situation. However, if an outer EVAL-WHEN does not
specify COMPILE, this does not necessarily suppress all compile-time
evaluation of its body, since EVAL-WHENs nested inside the body which
do specify the COMPILE situation can also cause compile-time
evaluation. I think this asymmetry in the handling of the COMPILE
situation is confusing and unaesthetic.
I am also concerned about the complexity of the specification for the
behavior of EVAL-WHEN. I believe it is possible to come up with a
much simpler specification that also "fixes" the nesting problem.
As I said in my original reply, I'm willing to work on such an
alternate proposal if others are interested in seeing it, but if
everybody else is already perfectly happy with your new proposal I
won't try to obstruct it.
-Sandra
-------