[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
issue EVAL-WHEN-NON-TOP-LEVEL, version 2
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: issue EVAL-WHEN-NON-TOP-LEVEL, version 2
- From: Jon L White <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Wed, 21 Dec 88 20:21:57 PST
- Cc: email@example.com
- In-reply-to: Sandra J Loosemore's message of Fri, 16 Dec 88 17:16:28 MST <8812170016.AA05978@defun.utah.edu>
Since we are tending towards flushing COMPILER-LET, then I favor
restricting the COMPILE situation to "toplevel" forms. However, that
entails straightening out the mess about what really is "toplevel". We
cannot "pass" this proposal without a satisfactory resolution of the
toplevel definition -- e.g., PROGN "passes ``top-level'' through", but
LET does not (even if the list of bound variables is null).
I'm not sure if this has been answered in subsequent mailings, but
the analysis given under the heading:
"When an EVAL-WHEN form is processed by the compiler:"
lists two alternatives in a way that might imply they are mutually
(1) If the situation COMPILE is specified:
(2) If the situation LOAD is specified, ...
One needs to cover the case when both COMPILE and LOAD are specified.
In addition, does the compiler act differently on situation (EVAL)
than it does on situation (LOAD)? How about (EVAL LOAD)?
-- JonL --