[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: user interface macros
- To: David Gray <gray@lucid.com>
- Subject: Re: user interface macros
- From: Gregor J. Kiczales <gregor@parc.xerox.com>
- Date: Thu, 3 May 90 12:21 PDT
- Cc: Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, Cyphers@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, jonl@lucid.com, bobrow@parc.xerox.com, rivieres@parc.xerox.com, rpg@lucid.com, Dussud@lucid.com, jkf@franz.com, paepcke@hplap.hpl.hp.com, jutta@ztivax.siemens.com, mop.pa@Xerox.COM
- In-reply-to: <9005031847.AA06008@black-monday>
Date: Thu, 3 May 90 11:47:44 PDT
From: David Gray <gray@lucid.com>
No, there should be just one environment argument. Perhaps there should be
a function to test whether it is a compile-time environment (NULL is most
certainly not that function), but I would want to see the need for that
demonstrated first. For the metaclass writer, the point is to be
consistent about passing the received environment on to FIND-CLASS,
MACROEXPAND, ENSURE-GENERIC-FUNCTION, etc.
My idea was that the predicate would be the extra argument. User code
would still be required to pass the argument on to the other functions
(find-class etc.). User code would pass the value of the :environment
argument, no other values. The other argument would just be a flag to
user code that this was in the compile environment and things might be
weird.