0.pre7.122:

[sbcl.git] / src / code / defboot.lisp

diff --git a/src/code/defboot.lisp b/src/code/defboot.lisp
index b8a9ddd..b11c1d2 100644 (file)
--- a/src/code/defboot.lisp
+++ b/src/code/defboot.lisp
@@ -58,8 +58,8 @@
        ((list-of-symbols-p vars)
         (let ((temps (make-gensym-list (length vars))))
           `(multiple-value-bind ,temps ,value-form
-             ,@(mapcar #'(lambda (var temp)
-                           `(setq ,var ,temp))
+             ,@(mapcar (lambda (var temp)
+                         `(setq ,var ,temp))
                        vars temps)
              ,(car temps))))
        (t (error "Vars is not a list of symbols: ~S" vars))))
@@ -170,10 +170,13 @@
   (unless (symbol-package (fun-name-block-name name))
     (warn "DEFUN of uninterned symbol ~S (tricky for GENESIS)" name))
   (multiple-value-bind (forms decls doc) (parse-body body)
-    (let* ((lambda `(lambda ,args
-                     ,@decls
-                     (block ,(fun-name-block-name name)
-                       ,@forms)))
+    (let* (;; stuff shared between LAMBDA and INLINE-LAMBDA and NAMED-LAMBDA
+          (lambda-guts `(,args
+                         ,@decls
+                         (block ,(fun-name-block-name name)
+                           ,@forms)))
+          (lambda `(lambda ,@lambda-guts))
+          (named-lambda `(named-lambda ,name ,@lambda-guts))
           (inline-lambda
            (cond (;; Does the user not even want to inline?
                   (not (inline-fun-name-p name))
@@ -197,11 +200,16 @@
                   ;; simplified way.
                   `(sb!c:lambda-with-lexenv
                     nil nil nil ; i.e. no DECLS, no MACROS, no SYMMACS
-                    ,@(rest lambda))))))
+                    ,@lambda-guts)))))
       `(progn
 
         ;; In cross-compilation of toplevel DEFUNs, we arrange
         ;; for the LAMBDA to be statically linked by GENESIS.
+        ;;
+        ;; It may seem strangely inconsistent not to use NAMED-LAMBDA
+        ;; here instead of LAMBDA. The reason is historical:
+        ;; COLD-FSET was written before NAMED-LAMBDA, and has special
+        ;; logic of its own to notify the compiler about NAME.
         #+sb-xc-host
         (cold-fset ,name ,lambda)
 
@@ -213,7 +221,7 @@
                 ;; where the compiled LAMBDA first appears. In
                 ;; cross-compilation, we manipulate the
                 ;; previously-statically-linked LAMBDA here.
-                #-sb-xc-host ,lambda
+                #-sb-xc-host ,named-lambda
                 #+sb-xc-host (fdefinition ',name)
                 ,doc)))))
 #-sb-xc-host
@@ -225,6 +233,13 @@
     (/show0 "redefining NAME in %DEFUN")
     (style-warn "redefining ~S in DEFUN" name))
   (setf (sb!xc:fdefinition name) def)
+  
+  ;; FIXME: I want to do this here (and fix bug 137), but until the
+  ;; breathtaking CMU CL function name architecture is converted into
+  ;; something sane, (1) doing so doesn't really fix the bug, and 
+  ;; (2) doing probably isn't even really safe.
+  #+nil (setf (%fun-name def) name)
+
   (when doc
     ;; FIXME: This should use shared SETF-name-parsing logic.
     (if (and (consp name) (eq (first name) 'setf))