Greetings! This should not be too difficult, but I think it would require a modification we've discussed before -- keeping the lisp source around post compilation.
In fact, I don't see whay a cl compiler could not do as in scheme as mentioned in one of your other posts and automatically inline mutual recursion too. Currently, GCL will inline lambdas with onla a small subset of the possible lambda list special symbols (e.g. &optional et.al.) present. Take care, Robert Boyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > It seems to me that ideally and eventually GCL could provide > the possibility of inlining calls to a user's Lisp function, > say foo, for the mere expression (declare (inline foo)). > > I am not sure whether this has ever been done really well > for any programming language, but it is something that > programmers do in their heads all the time, but with many > mistakes. In a nice, clean mathematical setting such as the > lambda calculus, it is a piece of cake, to inline, > logically, in principle. But as soon as one starts > manipulating bound variables, historically terrible mistakes > occur. Throw in order of evaluation issues, keywords, and > all the glories of Common Lisp and you have something that > is almost unthinkably hard in the general case. In the old > days, when every reference to memory cost a uniform time, > say, one microsecond, inline optimizations could be > fabulously effective. Now, with so many different caches, > pipes, etc., I don't really know. > > Bob > > > > -- Camm Maguire [EMAIL PROTECTED] ========================================================================== "The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens." -- Baha'u'llah _______________________________________________ Gcl-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcl-devel
