[Openmcl-devel] DEFSTRUCT and :INCLUDE

james anderson james.anderson at setf.de
Wed Oct 14 11:14:36 PDT 2009

On 2009-10-14, at 19:48 , Tim Bradshaw wrote:

> On 14 Oct 2009, at 16:38, james anderson wrote:
>>> On the other hand the same argument says that this is fixing a  
>>> problem
>>> which never affects any code, so why do it?
>> because one should be able to expect expressions in the language  
>> to specify coherent behavior.
> I agree.  What I meant, however, was that in pragmatic terms of  
> allocating resource to fix bugs (if we regard this as a bug), a bug  
> which affects no users should be fairly far down the list.  (I  
> might have a look at it out of curiosity, but I'm not about to jump  
> up and down and expect the official maintainers to do so!)

a filed bug, which was not then closed as "do not fix", allows a  
purportedly conforming implementation to record that is excludes the  
alternative, "macro-like" behavior from its understanding of  
conformance. even were the bug to remain open indefinitely, its  
existence would demonstrate the implementation's judgement, that any  
program which were to depend on that behavior, would be nonconformant.

More information about the Openmcl-devel mailing list