re: Random metaclasses for CL types

[Dick Gabriel <RPG@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>]

[In reply to message from Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM sent Wed, 24 May 89 13:46 EDT.]

Gabriel to Earth. Now hear this. My suggestion is to delete the
following paragraph from the specification:

``Each class that corresponds to a predefined Common Lisp type specifier
can be implemented in one of three ways, at the discretion of each
implementation.  It can be a {\bit standard class\/} (of the kind
defined by {\bf defclass}), a {\bit structure class\/} (defined
by {\bf defstruct}), or a {\bit built-in class\/} (implemented in
a special, non-extensible way).''

And change this one:

``It is possible to determine whether a class is a built-in class by
checking the metaclass.  A standard class is an instance of {\bf
standard-class}, a built-in class is an instance of {\bf
built-in-class}, and a structure class is an instance of {\bf
structure-class}.''

to this:

``A standard class is an instance of {\bf standard-class} and a structure
class is an instance of {\bf structure-class}.''

			-rpg-