[Sorry for possible duplicates]
I just realized that compiler macros might be too restrictive in some
implementations. Take for instance
(define-compiler-macro foo (a &key key-arg) ...)
This is assuming that FOO is only going to be invoked with _constant_
keyword arguments. I know, I know, most uses will have always one argument
or :KEY-ARG, but suppose you want to call (FOO some-value
a-non-constant-expression some-other-value)... What is the compiler to do?
I _now_ think that the compiler macro processor should simply recognize the
failure to parse the form and return the original form, unprocessed, but
the implementations I have at hand do not do that. ECL to begin with, but
also CCL and SBCL.
Any opinions on this?
Juanjo
--
Instituto de Física Fundamental, CSIC
c/ Serrano, 113b, Madrid 28006 (Spain)
http://juanjose.garciaripoll.googlepages.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure
contains a definitive record of customers, application performance,
security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this
data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d
_______________________________________________
Ecls-list mailing list
Ecls-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ecls-list
