[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Issue: DECLARE-ARRAY-TYPE-ELEMENT-REFERENCES
- From: Jon L White <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Wed, 4 Jan 89 02:22:57 PST
- Cc: email@example.com
- In-reply-to: Dan L. Pierson's message of Tue, 03 Jan 89 12:15:07 EST <8901031715.AA12970@mist.>
re: But if all that Dan wanted to say was that the array
references were assumed to satisfy the *upgrade* of the declared type,
then there would be no problem (with that part).
Sorry, but that's exactly the opposite of what I meant. If I declare
an array, FOO, to be (SIGNED-BYTE 5), within the scope of that
definition I'm saying that expect references to that array to be
(THE (SIGNED-BYTE 5) (AREF FOO X))
No matter what the array was upgraded to.
Yea, that's what I thought you meant, and that's what I think is
inconsistent with the "unification" in issue ARRAY-ELEMENT-TYPE-SEMANTICS.
re: Actually, your name got put in support because of an early message of
yours (which I finally found) in the ARRAY-ELEMENT-TYPE-SEMANTICS
discussion. I'll be happy to remove your name if we now disagree.
I fear that my very first reading of DECLARE-ARRAY-TYPE-ELEMENT-REFERENCES
was too hasty, and I incorrectly thought it was subsumed by
ARRAY-ELEMENT-TYPE-SEMANTICS. I'm sure I recanted that apostasy in
re: As I've said before, I support a strict type checking mode for all
Common Lisp compilers. However I now suspect that it's too late (and
maybe too experimental) to get in this version of the standard. I
said I'd write up a proposal for it at the cleanup meeting last
October, but was later talked out of doing so.
Why? [i.e., Why did you get "talked out of doing so"?] I remember
discussing this with you at length during the Palo Alto meeting in
March 1988 and likeing it very much. However -- I hasten to point
out -- it would help not to confuse this issue with the very limited
scope of DECLARE-ARRAY-TYPE-ELEMENT-REFERENCES, which has it's own
peculiar problems related to "upgrading".
-- JonL --