Re: (setf (foo #) value), foo being undefined yet

[haible (Bruno Haible)]

Joerg Hoehle writes:

> I wonder whether the above code using a yet undefined setf is correct
> for CLtLI or CLtLII. In CLtLII, setf, seeing an unknown (setf (f #) #)
> form, has been expanded to produce a call to the (setf f) function,
> whereas in CLtLI (setf f) was not considered as being a function name.

True.

> I'm not sure whether the above code intended to make use of this
> extended setf behaviour and thus was written for CLtLII.

Apparently.

> I'm tempted to believe that the above code is wrong w.r.t. both
> standards and that it should have been written in another way

It is wrong only w.r.t. CLTL1, but is will be a good idea to change
the macroexpansion of (DEFROUTINE ...) from
(PROGN
  (DEFUN ADD1-NAM** (N)
    (LET ((N (EVAL N)))
      (COND ((< (I**) N) (SETF (E**) (+ (E**) 1))) (T NIL))
      (VALUES)
  ) )
  (DEFMACRO ADD1-NAM (E I N)
    `(PROGN
       ,@(DEFTHUNK 'E** E)
       ,@(DEFTHUNK 'I** I)
       (MULTIPLE-VALUE-BIND NIL (ADD1-NAM** ,N))
       NIL
) )  )
to something like
(PROGN
  (EVAL-WHEN (COMPILE LOAD EVAL)
    ,@(DEFTHUNK 'E** E)
    ,@(DEFTHUNK 'I** I)
  )
  (DEFMACRO ADD1-NAM (E I N)
    (ONCE-ONLY (E I N)
      `(PROGN
         (COND ((< (I**) N) (SETF (E**) (+ (E**) 1))) (T NIL))
         (VALUES)
  ) )  )
)

                    Bruno Haible
                    haible@ma2s2.mathematik.uni-karlsruhe.de