[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Issue: DEFSTRUCT-ACCESS-FUNCTIONS (Version 1)
- To: CL-Cleanup@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
- Subject: Issue: DEFSTRUCT-ACCESS-FUNCTIONS (Version 1)
- From: Kent M Pitman <KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Date: Thu, 10 Nov 88 13:33 EST
Kathy recently forwarded this to me. It looks reasonable to me.
I guess the question is whether anyone has an implementation in
which it would be inappropriate to do this inlining. If so, we'll
need to explore that.
References: DEFSTRUCT (p. 308)
Edit history: 5-Oct-88, Version 1 by Chapman
It is left up to the implementation whether or not the DEFSTRUCT access
function is declared inline.
Make it mandatory that implementations declare access functions inline.
Of course the declaration may or may not mean anything within the
This requirement resolves user ambiguity.
This clarification will give users insurance that the inline declaration
has been made for the access function.