Re: function type specifiers in LOOP

[Edi Weitz]

Marco Antoniotti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> > Edi Weitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > 
> > > What's the right way to get rid of this note and help CMUCL in
> > > optimizing the code?
> > 
> > I think I've found it. This code seems to make CMUCL happy:
> > 
> >   (loop for matcher in all-matchers
> >         thereis (funcall (the function matcher) start-pos))
> 
> Wouldn't
> 
>     (loop for matcher of-type function in all-matchers
>           thereis (funcall matcher start-pos))
> 
> work?  (Have not tested it)

Duh... it works. My problem was that I did two steps instead of
one. It didn't occur to me to write

  of-type function

(which works) but I wrote

  of-type (function (fixnum) (or fixnum null))

instead which doesn't work... :(

Thanks,
Edi.