(declare (truly-dynamic-extent subscripts))
(row-major-aref array (%array-row-major-index array subscripts)))
-(defun %aset (array &rest stuff)
- (declare (truly-dynamic-extent stuff))
- (let ((subscripts (butlast stuff))
- (new-value (car (last stuff))))
- (setf (row-major-aref array (%array-row-major-index array subscripts))
- new-value)))
-
-;;; FIXME: What's supposed to happen with functions
-;;; like AREF when we (DEFUN (SETF FOO) ..) when
-;;; DEFSETF FOO is also defined? It seems as though the logical
-;;; thing to do would be to nuke the macro definition for (SETF FOO)
-;;; and replace it with the (SETF FOO) function, issuing a warning,
-;;; just as for ordinary functions
-;;; * (LISP-IMPLEMENTATION-VERSION)
-;;; "18a+ release x86-linux 2.4.7 6 November 1998 cvs"
-;;; * (DEFMACRO ZOO (X) `(+ ,X ,X))
-;;; ZOO
-;;; * (DEFUN ZOO (X) (* 3 X))
-;;; Warning: ZOO previously defined as a macro.
-;;; ZOO
-;;; But that doesn't seem to be what happens in CMU CL.
-;;;
-;;; KLUDGE: this is probably because ANSI, in its wisdom (CLHS
-;;; 5.1.2.5) requires implementations to support
-;;; (SETF (APPLY #'AREF ...) ...)
-;;; [and also #'BIT and #'SBIT]. Yes, this is terrifying, and it's
-;;; also terrifying that this sequence of definitions causes it to
-;;; work.
-;;;
-;;; Also, it would be nice to make DESCRIBE FOO tell whether a symbol
-;;; has a setf expansion and/or a setf function defined.
-
-#!-sb-fluid (declaim (inline (setf aref)))
+;;; (setf aref/bit/sbit) are implemented using setf-functions,
+;;; because they have to work with (setf (apply #'aref array subscripts))
+;;; All other setfs can be done using setf-functions too, but I
+;;; haven't found technical advantages or disatvantages for either
+;;; scheme.
(defun (setf aref) (new-value array &rest subscripts)
- (declare (truly-dynamic-extent subscripts))
- (declare (type array array))
+ (declare (truly-dynamic-extent subscripts)
+ (type array array))
(setf (row-major-aref array (%array-row-major-index array subscripts))
new-value))
(defun row-major-aref (array index)
#!+sb-doc
- "Return the element of array corressponding to the row-major index. This is
- SETF'able."
+ "Return the element of array corresponding to the row-major index. This is
+ SETFable."
(declare (optimize (safety 1)))
(row-major-aref array index))
(defun svref (simple-vector index)
#!+sb-doc
- "Return the INDEX'th element of the given Simple-Vector."
+ "Return the INDEXth element of the given Simple-Vector."
(declare (optimize (safety 1)))
(aref simple-vector index))
(defun bit (bit-array &rest subscripts)
#!+sb-doc
"Return the bit from the BIT-ARRAY at the specified SUBSCRIPTS."
- (declare (type (array bit) bit-array) (optimize (safety 1)))
+ (declare (type (array bit) bit-array)
+ (optimize (safety 1)))
(row-major-aref bit-array (%array-row-major-index bit-array subscripts)))
-(defun %bitset (bit-array &rest stuff)
- (declare (type (array bit) bit-array) (optimize (safety 1)))
- (let ((subscripts (butlast stuff))
- (new-value (car (last stuff))))
- (setf (row-major-aref bit-array
- (%array-row-major-index bit-array subscripts))
- new-value)))
-
-#!-sb-fluid (declaim (inline (setf bit)))
(defun (setf bit) (new-value bit-array &rest subscripts)
- (declare (type (array bit) bit-array) (optimize (safety 1)))
+ (declare (type (array bit) bit-array)
+ (type bit new-value)
+ (optimize (safety 1)))
(setf (row-major-aref bit-array
(%array-row-major-index bit-array subscripts))
new-value))
(defun sbit (simple-bit-array &rest subscripts)
#!+sb-doc
"Return the bit from SIMPLE-BIT-ARRAY at the specified SUBSCRIPTS."
- (declare (type (simple-array bit) simple-bit-array) (optimize (safety 1)))
+ (declare (type (simple-array bit) simple-bit-array)
+ (optimize (safety 1)))
(row-major-aref simple-bit-array
(%array-row-major-index simple-bit-array subscripts)))
-;;; KLUDGE: Not all these things (%SET-ROW-MAJOR-AREF, %SET-FILL-POINTER,
-;;; %SET-FDEFINITION, %SCHARSET, %SBITSET..) seem to deserve separate names.
-;;; Could we just DEFUN (SETF SBIT) etc. and get rid of the non-ANSI names?
-;;; -- WHN 19990911
-(defun %sbitset (simple-bit-array &rest stuff)
- (declare (type (simple-array bit) simple-bit-array) (optimize (safety 1)))
- (let ((subscripts (butlast stuff))
- (new-value (car (last stuff))))
- (setf (row-major-aref simple-bit-array
- (%array-row-major-index simple-bit-array subscripts))
- new-value)))
-
-#!-sb-fluid (declaim (inline (setf sbit)))
(defun (setf sbit) (new-value bit-array &rest subscripts)
- (declare (type (simple-array bit) bit-array) (optimize (safety 1)))
+ (declare (type (simple-array bit) bit-array)
+ (type bit new-value)
+ (optimize (safety 1)))
(setf (row-major-aref bit-array
(%array-row-major-index bit-array subscripts))
new-value))
;;; should probably be based on the VECTOR-PUSH-EXTEND code (which is
;;; new ca. sbcl-0.7.0) rather than the VECTOR-PUSH code (which dates
;;; back to CMU CL).
-(defun vector-push (new-el array)
+(defun vector-push (new-element array)
#!+sb-doc
"Attempt to set the element of ARRAY designated by its fill pointer
- to NEW-EL, and increment the fill pointer by one. If the fill pointer is
+ to NEW-ELEMENT, and increment the fill pointer by one. If the fill pointer is
too large, NIL is returned, otherwise the index of the pushed element is
returned."
(let ((fill-pointer (fill-pointer array)))
nil)
(t
(locally (declare (optimize (safety 0)))
- (setf (aref array fill-pointer) new-el))
+ (setf (aref array fill-pointer) new-element))
(setf (%array-fill-pointer array) (1+ fill-pointer))
fill-pointer))))
projects / sbcl.git / blobdiff