[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Issue: CLOS-CONDITIONS (Version 1)
- To: Kent M Pitman <KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Subject: Issue: CLOS-CONDITIONS (Version 1)
- From: David A. Moon <Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Date: Wed, 28 Sep 88 12:03 EDT
- Cc: CL-ERROR-HANDLING@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, Gregor.PA@Xerox.COM
- In-reply-to: <880927180538.1.KMP@GRYPHON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Line-fold: No
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 88 18:05 EDT
From: Kent M Pitman <KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Define that CLOS condition types are CLOS classes.
Define that CLOS condition objects are CLOS instances.
Is the first occurrence of CLOS on each line a typo? If not,
I don't know what a "CLOS condition" is.
Define that condition reporting is mediated through the
PRINT-OBJECT method for the condition type (class) in question,
with *PRINT-ESCAPE* always being NIL. Specifying
(:REPORT fn) in the definition of a condition type C is
equivalent to doing
(DEFMETHOD PRINT-OBJECT ((X c) STREAM)
(IF *PRINT-ESCAPE* (CALL-NEXT-METHOD) (fn X C)))
(fn X C) should be (fn X STREAM). Also, use upper or lower
case C consistently.
Clarify that DEFINE-CONDITION automatically adds :INITARG
and :READER slot-options. Specify what happens if the user
writes these slot-options herself; do they override the
default ones, or do both sets of slot-options apply?
* Daniels still thinks there should be a way to access and modify report
functions for conditions without going through DEFINE-CONDITION again.
[This has been blocked waiting for CLOS to settle down.]
I'm not sure whether you regard this issue as settled now, or
need to do something more.
Some functions like SIGNAL take an argument that can be among
other things a condition-type. Is it valid to use a class object
as a condition type, in addition to a class name being valid?
CLOS itself signals some new errors and standardized condition
names for those signals could be added.
There are also a lot of editorial changes to be made to the
rev-18 document, to reflect the existence of CLOS. They're
pretty obvious, like take out all the complaints that there
is no standardized object system.