+ ;; the current OPTIMIZE policy
+ (policy *policy* :type policy))
+
+;;; support for the idiom (in MACROEXPAND and elsewhere) that NIL is
+;;; to be taken as a null lexical environment
+(defun coerce-to-lexenv (x)
+ (etypecase x
+ (null (make-null-lexenv))
+ (lexenv x)))
+
+(defun maybe-inline-syntactic-closure (lambda lexenv)
+ (declare (type list lambda) (type lexenv lexenv))
+ (aver (eql (first lambda) 'lambda))
+ ;; We used to have a trivial implementation, verifying that lexenv
+ ;; was effectively null. However, this fails to take account of the
+ ;; idiom
+ ;;
+ ;; (declaim (inline foo))
+ ;; (macrolet ((def (x) `(defun ,x () ...)))
+ ;; (def foo))
+ ;;
+ ;; which, while too complicated for the cross-compiler to handle in
+ ;; unfriendly foreign lisp environments, would be good to support in
+ ;; the target compiler. -- CSR, 2002-05-13 and 2002-11-02
+ (let ((vars (lexenv-vars lexenv))
+ (funs (lexenv-funs lexenv)))
+ (collect ((decls) (macros) (symbol-macros))
+ (cond
+ ((or (lexenv-blocks lexenv) (lexenv-tags lexenv)) nil)
+ ((and (null vars) (null funs)) `(lambda-with-lexenv
+ nil nil nil
+ ,@(cdr lambda)))
+ ((dolist (x vars nil)
+ #+sb-xc-host
+ ;; KLUDGE: too complicated for cross-compilation
+ (return t)
+ #-sb-xc-host
+ (let ((name (car x))
+ (what (cdr x)))
+ ;; only worry about the innermost binding
+ (when (eq x (assoc name vars :test #'eq))
+ (typecase what
+ (cons
+ (aver (eq (car what) 'macro))
+ (symbol-macros x))
+ (global-var
+ ;; A global should not appear in the lexical
+ ;; environment? Is this true? FIXME!
+ (aver (eq (global-var-kind what) :special))
+ (decls `(special ,name)))
+ (t
+ ;; we can't inline in the presence of this object
+ (return t))))))
+ nil)
+ ((dolist (x funs nil)
+ #+sb-xc-host
+ ;; KLUDGE: too complicated for cross-compilation (and
+ ;; failure of OAOO in comments, *sigh*)
+ (return t)
+ #-sb-xc-host
+ (let ((name (car x))
+ (what (cdr x)))
+ ;; again, only worry about the innermost binding, but
+ ;; functions can have name (SETF FOO) so we need to use
+ ;; EQUAL for the test.
+ (when (eq x (assoc name funs :test #'equal))
+ (typecase what
+ (cons
+ (macros (cons name (function-lambda-expression (cdr what)))))
+ ;; FIXME: Is there a good reason for this not to be
+ ;; DEFINED-FUN (which :INCLUDEs GLOBAL-VAR, in case
+ ;; you're wondering how this ever worked :-)? Maybe
+ ;; in conjunction with an AVERrance that it's not an
+ ;; (AND GLOBAL-VAR (NOT GLOBAL-FUN))? -- CSR,
+ ;; 2002-07-08
+ (global-var
+ (when (defined-fun-p what)
+ (decls `(,(car (rassoc (defined-fun-inlinep what)
+ *inlinep-translations*))
+ ,name))))
+ (t (return t))))))
+ nil)
+ (t
+ ;; if we get this far, we've successfully dealt with
+ ;; everything in FUNS and VARS, so:
+ `(lambda-with-lexenv ,(decls) ,(macros) ,(symbol-macros)
+ ,@(cdr lambda)))))))
+