[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: David A. Moon <Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Subject: Issue: TYPE-OF-UNDERCONSTRAINED
- From: masinter.pa@Xerox.COM
- Date: 21 Sep 88 02:47 PDT
- Cc: cl-cleanup@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
- In-reply-to: David A. Moon <Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>'s message of Tue, 13 Sep 88 10:22 EDT
This is in response to mail under COERCE-FROM-TYPE and TYPE-OF. I would prefer
to constrain TYPE-OF to be at least as specific as (CLASS-NAME (CLASS-OF x)).
I'm less sure what to do about instances of unnamed classes; the Medley way
would be to return the class itself for an otherwise nameless class.
This would disallow what is otherwise "legal" now: namely to have TYPE-OF return
T for everything but structure instances.
I think it probably is reasonable also to constrain TYPE-OF to be something that
SUBTYPEP can deal with. (cf SUBTYPEP-TOO-VAGUE).
If I don't here any objections, I'll try to write this up when I get back that
far in the alphabet.
Meanwhile, I'll make a pass on COERCE-INCOMPLETE.