[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: issue CLOS-MACRO-COMPILATION, version 1
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 89 18:06:53 CST
From: David N Gray <Gray@DSG.csc.ti.com>
> Proposal CLOS-MACRO-COMPILATION:MINIMAL:
> * The method is not callable at compile-time. If there is a generic
> function with the same name at compile-time, compiling a DEFMETHOD
> will not add the method to that generic function.
> [This also seems to imply that tests for existence of the generic
> function, lambda-list congruence, etc. must not happen until
> load time.]
No, an implementation should be permitted to check for lambda-list
congruence between methods defined in the same file; this doesn't
require any reference to the resident generic function definition. If
the file doesn't include a DEFGENERIC, then the first DEFMETHOD defines
the compile-time generic function attributes, and subsequent methods can
be checked against that.
Agreed. I would phrase it differently: all the DEFGENERICs and DEFMETHODS
for a given generic function name in a given compilation unit can be checked
against each other for lambda-list congruence.
> * The method combination can be used in a subsequent DEFGENERIC. If it
> is referenced, the body of a long form of method combination must be
> evaluable at compile-time.
But if methods are not installed at compile time and generic functions
are not callable at compile time, then I don't think there is any
situation in which the method combination body could be executed at
Some implementations compose and compile effective methods at compile
time, which of course requires evaluating the body of the
define-method-combination at compile time.
I haven't read Sandra's proposal yet.