[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: issue CONSTANT-CIRCULAR-COMPILATION, version 4
- To: Jeff Dalton <jeff%aiai.edinburgh.ac.uk@NSS.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK>
- Subject: Re: issue CONSTANT-CIRCULAR-COMPILATION, version 4
- From: email@example.com (Sandra J Loosemore)
- Date: Tue, 24 Jan 89 14:09:31 MST
- Cc: David N Gray <Gray%dsg.csc.ti.com@NSS.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK>, Cris Perdue <firstname.lastname@example.org>, sandra <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org
- In-reply-to: Jeff Dalton <jeff%aiai.edinburgh.ac.uk@NSS.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK>, Tue, 24 Jan 89 20:46:24 GMT
> I do not think it's reasonable to make the language weaker than the
> source notation; and so I don't think *dump-circle* should exist
> at all: it should always be as if it were true.
Well, by this reasoning, *print-circle* shouldn't exist either. I
take it you would like to see another proposal added that requires the
compiler to correctly handle circularity and sharing all the time?