[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Issue: DEFINE-OPTIMIZER (Version 2)
- To: Kent M Pitman <KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Subject: Re: Issue: DEFINE-OPTIMIZER (Version 2)
- From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Sandra J Loosemore)
- Date: Fri, 10 Mar 89 16:22:53 MST
- Cc: CL-Compiler@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
- In-reply-to: Kent M Pitman <KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>, Fri, 10 Mar 89 16:21 EST
This is looking better, but I personally would still want to see
a few things clarified before I could vote for it.
o Can you put declarations in the body? I don't see any reason why not,
except that the writeup doesn't say so.
o Can you define an optimizer for a macro as well as a function? (If it
were permitted, it might make the interaction between OPTIMIZE-EXPRESSION
and MACROEXPAND kind of confusing.)
o I don't think OPTIMIZE-EXPRESSION-1 should apply an optimizer that
has been defined for a function that is lexically shadowed (as by
an FLET or MACROLET) in the environment. Can we say something
specific about what happen in this situation, one way or the other?
Otherwise, I think the basic idea is fine.