[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: CL-Cleanup@sail.stanford.edu
- Subject: DYNAMIC-EXTENT
- From: Richard Mlynarik <Mly@AI.AI.MIT.EDU>
- Date: Fri, 17 Mar 89 13:29 EST
- In-reply-to: <890316-120057-5042@Xerox>
I don't see any way in the proposal to declare that a closure itself, rather than
its arguments, has dynamic extent. My greatest single use for dynamic-extent
declarations is to ensure stack-consing of closures.
Symbolics have a declaration SYS:DOWNWARD-FUNCTION for this case.
Perhaps CL could use DYNAMIC-EXTENT-FUNCTION
(flet ((test (a b)
(foo (lambda (a b)
Another feature which I find sorely needed (and which nobody seems
to support) is a way to declare that the result of a form
has dynamic extent. For example,
(defmacro with-frob (thunk &body body)
`(let ((*frob-stack* (cons (the dynamic-extent-object ,thunk) *frob-stack*)))
(declare (dynamic-extent *frob-stack*))
The idea is to avoid making all users of the with-frob macro
put in explicit dynamic-extent-function declarations.