[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
re: Random metaclasses for CL types
- To: Dick Gabriel <RPG@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
- Subject: re: Random metaclasses for CL types
- From: David N Gray <Gray@dsg.csc.ti.com>
- Date: Wed, 24 May 89 16:22:32 CDT
- Cc: Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.SYMBOLICS.COM, dussud@LUCID.COM, jonl@LUCID.COM, common-lisp-object-system@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
- In-reply-to: Msg of 24 May 89 1144 PDT from Dick Gabriel <RPG@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
- Reply-to: <Common-Lisp-Object-System-mailer@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
- Sender: GRAY@kelvin.csc.ti.com
> Gabriel to Earth. Now hear this. My suggestion is to delete the
> following paragraph from the specification:
...
In other, words, delete the use of BUILT-IN-CLASS? I don't think that's a
good idea, because BUILT-IN-CLASS does serve a useful purpose: it serves
notice that there may exist some classes for which MAKE-INSTANCE and
SLOT-VALUE are not legal, and it provides a way to test whether a given
class has those restrictions. Thus, while the result of, for example,
(CLASS-OF (FIND-CLASS 'READTABLE))
should be permitted to be implementation-dependent, it should be
meaningful for portable code to test for
(TYPEP (FIND-CLASS 'READTABLE) 'BUILT-IN-CLASS)
in order to find out if READTABLEs can have slots in the current
implementation.