Greetings!
Robert Boyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Fixed? Hmmmm? > > Consider these predicates: > > (defun foo (x) nil) > (defun bar (x) t) > > (subtypep '(satisfies foo) '(satisfies bar)) was NIL, T and is now NIL, NIL. > That is a better answer and an acceptable answer. Good. But T, T would be > even better, even best! > > (subtypep '(satisfies bar) '(satisfies foo)) was NIL, T and that was a better > answer than the current NIL, NIL, which is ok but merely because it is an > always acceptable, mealy-mouthed cop-out: "I dunno!" > > Note: I am not asking for any further work here, just thinking out loud. > Maybe in some future life we'll open up SATISFIES predicates. Probably a > giant swamp. I think swamp is accurate. I was quite proud that we could determine that satisfies was some unknown blob and still infer the subtypep relationship where possible, e.g. `(and cons (satisfies foo)) 'list, until I see that cmucl and clisp do the same. As they do on your examples above. Maybe we have merely caught up. Sigh. Take care, > > Bob > > > > > -- Camm Maguire [EMAIL PROTECTED] ========================================================================== "The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens." -- Baha'u'llah _______________________________________________ Gcl-devel mailing list Gcl-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcl-devel
