Problems with CommonLoops

[Rob Pettengill <rcp%sw.MCC.COM@MCC.COM>]

   Date: 30 Jan 88  1406 PST
   From: Dick Gabriel <RPG@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>

   As time goes on PCL is becoming CLOS. Gregor mentioned in his release
   message that with-slots has changed to conform to the latest definition.
   Although I cannot speak for Gregor or Xerox, there will soon be increased
   pressure to conform to CLOS, and people using PCL should be aware that it
   will be changing to meet that specification. Such changes cannot be viewed
   as ``problems'' with PCL. Here is the latest specification of with-slots:

   with-slots							Macro
   ....
   (with-slots ((x1 x)
		(y1 y))
	       position-1
     (with-slots ((x2 x)
		  (y2 y))
		 position-2
	(psetf x1 x2
	       y1 y2))))

I'm sorry if I wasn't clear.  We are eagerly looking forward to the
convervence of PCL and the CLOS spec.  However, according to the
pcl/notes.text with-slots in the current version was to correspond to
the old syntax and with-slots* was to correspond to the new syntax.
The purpose of this was to allow a gradual conversion to the new
syntax.  The problem I found was that neither seems to be true.  The
old syntax is no longer full suppoted and the new syntax (in the
example above) also causes an error.  

;rob


  Robert C. Pettengill, MCC Software Technology Program
  P. O. Box 200195, Austin, Texas  78720
  ARPA:  rcp@mcc.com            PHONE:  (512) 338-3533
  UUCP:  {ihnp4,seismo,harvard,gatech,pyramid}!ut-sally!im4u!milano!rcp