(class-prototype (or (generic-function-method-class gf?)
(find-class 'standard-method)))))))
\f
-(defvar *optimize-asv-funcall-p* nil)
-(defvar *asv-readers*)
-(defvar *asv-writers*)
-(defvar *asv-boundps*)
-
(defun expand-defmethod (name
proto-gf
proto-method
lambda-list
body
env)
- (let ((*optimize-asv-funcall-p* t)
- (*asv-readers* nil) (*asv-writers* nil) (*asv-boundps* nil))
- (multiple-value-bind (method-lambda unspecialized-lambda-list specializers)
- (add-method-declarations name qualifiers lambda-list body env)
- (multiple-value-bind (method-function-lambda initargs)
- (make-method-lambda proto-gf proto-method method-lambda env)
- (let ((initargs-form (make-method-initargs-form proto-gf
- proto-method
- method-function-lambda
- initargs
- env)))
- `(progn
- ;; Note: We could DECLAIM the ftype of the generic
- ;; function here, since ANSI specifies that we create it
- ;; if it does not exist. However, I chose not to, because
- ;; I think it's more useful to support a style of
- ;; programming where every generic function has an
- ;; explicit DEFGENERIC and any typos in DEFMETHODs are
- ;; warned about. Otherwise
- ;; (DEFGENERIC FOO-BAR-BLETCH ((X T)))
- ;; (DEFMETHOD FOO-BAR-BLETCH ((X HASH-TABLE)) ..)
- ;; (DEFMETHOD FOO-BRA-BLETCH ((X SIMPLE-VECTOR)) ..)
- ;; (DEFMETHOD FOO-BAR-BLETCH ((X VECTOR)) ..)
- ;; (DEFMETHOD FOO-BAR-BLETCH ((X ARRAY)) ..)
- ;; (DEFMETHOD FOO-BAR-BLETCH ((X LIST)) ..)
- ;; compiles without raising an error and runs without
- ;; raising an error (since SIMPLE-VECTOR cases fall
- ;; through to VECTOR) but still doesn't do what was
- ;; intended. I hate that kind of bug (code which silently
- ;; gives the wrong answer), so we don't do a DECLAIM
- ;; here. -- WHN 20000229
- ,@(when (or *asv-readers* *asv-writers* *asv-boundps*)
- `((initialize-internal-slot-gfs*
- ',*asv-readers* ',*asv-writers* ',*asv-boundps*)))
- ,(make-defmethod-form name qualifiers specializers
- unspecialized-lambda-list
- (if proto-method
- (class-name (class-of proto-method))
- 'standard-method)
- initargs-form
- (getf (getf initargs :plist)
- :pv-table-symbol))))))))
+ (multiple-value-bind (method-lambda unspecialized-lambda-list specializers)
+ (add-method-declarations name qualifiers lambda-list body env)
+ (multiple-value-bind (method-function-lambda initargs)
+ (make-method-lambda proto-gf proto-method method-lambda env)
+ (let ((initargs-form (make-method-initargs-form proto-gf
+ proto-method
+ method-function-lambda
+ initargs
+ env)))
+ `(progn
+ ;; Note: We could DECLAIM the ftype of the generic function
+ ;; here, since ANSI specifies that we create it if it does
+ ;; not exist. However, I chose not to, because I think it's
+ ;; more useful to support a style of programming where every
+ ;; generic function has an explicit DEFGENERIC and any typos
+ ;; in DEFMETHODs are warned about. Otherwise
+ ;;
+ ;; (DEFGENERIC FOO-BAR-BLETCH ((X T)))
+ ;; (DEFMETHOD FOO-BAR-BLETCH ((X HASH-TABLE)) ..)
+ ;; (DEFMETHOD FOO-BRA-BLETCH ((X SIMPLE-VECTOR)) ..)
+ ;; (DEFMETHOD FOO-BAR-BLETCH ((X VECTOR)) ..)
+ ;; (DEFMETHOD FOO-BAR-BLETCH ((X ARRAY)) ..)
+ ;; (DEFMETHOD FOO-BAR-BLETCH ((X LIST)) ..)
+ ;;
+ ;; compiles without raising an error and runs without
+ ;; raising an error (since SIMPLE-VECTOR cases fall through
+ ;; to VECTOR) but still doesn't do what was intended. I hate
+ ;; that kind of bug (code which silently gives the wrong
+ ;; answer), so we don't do a DECLAIM here. -- WHN 20000229
+ ,(make-defmethod-form name qualifiers specializers
+ unspecialized-lambda-list
+ (if proto-method
+ (class-name (class-of proto-method))
+ 'standard-method)
+ initargs-form
+ (getf (getf initargs :plist)
+ :pv-table-symbol)))))))
(defun interned-symbol-p (x)
(and (symbolp x) (symbol-package x)))
((generic-function-name-p (car form))
(optimize-generic-function-call
form required-parameters env slots calls))
- ((and (eq (car form) 'asv-funcall)
- *optimize-asv-funcall-p*)
- (case (fourth form)
- (reader (push (third form) *asv-readers*))
- (writer (push (third form) *asv-writers*))
- (boundp (push (third form) *asv-boundps*)))
- `(,(second form) ,@(cddddr form)))
(t form))))
(let ((walked-lambda (walk-form method-lambda env #'walk-function)))
(let* ((sym (if (atom name) name (cadr name)))
(pkg-list (cons *pcl-package*
(package-use-list *pcl-package*))))
+ ;; FIXME: given the presence of generalized function
+ ;; names, this test is broken. A little
+ ;; reverse-engineering suggests that this was intended
+ ;; to prevent precompilation of things on some
+ ;; PCL-internal automatically-constructed functions
+ ;; like the old "~A~A standard class ~A reader"
+ ;; functions. When the CADR of SB-PCL::SLOT-ACCESSOR
+ ;; generalized functions was *, this test returned T,
+ ;; not NIL, and an error was signalled in
+ ;; MAKE-ACCESSOR-TABLE for (DEFUN FOO (X) (SLOT-VALUE X
+ ;; 'ASLDKJ)). Whether the right thing to do is to fix
+ ;; MAKE-ACCESSOR-TABLE so that it can work in the
+ ;; presence of slot names that have no classes, or to
+ ;; restore this test to something more obvious, I don't
+ ;; know. -- CSR, 2003-02-14
(and sym (symbolp sym)
(not (null (memq (symbol-package sym) pkg-list)))
(not (find #\space (symbol-name sym))))))))
projects / sbcl.git / blobdiff