(when old-method
(remove-method #'find-method-combination old-method))
(add-method #'find-method-combination new-method)
+ (setf (random-documentation type 'method-combination) doc)
type))
(defun short-combine-methods (type options operator ioa method doc)
(order (car (method-combination-options combin)))
(around ())
(primary ()))
- (dolist (m applicable-methods)
- (let ((qualifiers (method-qualifiers m)))
- (flet ((lose (method why)
- (invalid-method-error
- method
- "The method ~S ~A.~%~
- The method combination type ~S was defined with the~%~
- short form of DEFINE-METHOD-COMBINATION and so requires~%~
- all methods have either the single qualifier ~S or the~%~
- single qualifier :AROUND."
- method why type type)))
- (cond ((null qualifiers)
- (lose m "has no qualifiers"))
- ((cdr qualifiers)
- (lose m "has more than one qualifier"))
+ (flet ((invalid (gf combin m)
+ (if *in-precompute-effective-methods-p*
+ (return-from compute-effective-method
+ `(%invalid-qualifiers ',gf ',combin ',m))
+ (invalid-qualifiers gf combin m))))
+ (dolist (m applicable-methods)
+ (let ((qualifiers (method-qualifiers m)))
+ (cond ((null qualifiers) (invalid generic-function combin m))
+ ((cdr qualifiers) (invalid generic-function combin m))
((eq (car qualifiers) :around)
(push m around))
((eq (car qualifiers) type)
(push m primary))
- (t
- (lose m "has an illegal qualifier"))))))
+ (t (invalid generic-function combin m))))))
(setq around (nreverse around))
(ecase order
(:most-specific-last) ; nothing to be done, already in correct order
`(,operator ,@(mapcar (lambda (m) `(call-method ,m ()))
primary)))))
(cond ((null primary)
- ;; FIXME(?): NO-APPLICABLE-METHOD seems more appropriate
- ;; here, but
- ;; (1) discussion with CSR on #lisp reminded me that it's
- ;; a vexed question whether we can validly call
- ;; N-A-M when an :AROUND method exists (and the
- ;; definition of NO-NEXT-METHOD seems to discourage
- ;; us from calling NO-NEXT-METHOD directly in that
- ;; case, since it's supposed to be called from a
- ;; CALL-NEXT-METHOD form), and
- ;; (2) a call to N-A-M would require &REST FUN-ARGS, and
- ;; we don't seem to have FUN-ARGS here.
- ;; I think ideally failures in short method combination
- ;; would end up either in NO-APPLICABLE-METHOD or
- ;; NO-NEXT-METHOD, and I expect that's what ANSI
- ;; generally intended, but it's not clear to me whether
- ;; the details of what they actually specified let us
- ;; make that happen. So for now I've just tried to
- ;; clarify the error message text but left the general
- ;; logic alone (and raised the question on sbcl-devel).
- ;; -- WHN 2003-06-16
- `(error "no ~S methods for ~S on these arguments"
- ',type
- ',generic-function))
+ ;; As of sbcl-0.8.0.80 we don't seem to need to need
+ ;; to do anything messy like
+ ;; `(APPLY (FUNCTION (IF AROUND
+ ;; 'NO-PRIMARY-METHOD
+ ;; 'NO-APPLICABLE-METHOD)
+ ;; ',GENERIC-FUNCTION
+ ;; .ARGS.)
+ ;; here because (for reasons I don't understand at the
+ ;; moment -- WHN) control will never reach here if there
+ ;; are no applicable methods, but instead end up
+ ;; in NO-APPLICABLE-METHODS first.
+ ;;
+ ;; FIXME: The way that we arrange for .ARGS. to be bound
+ ;; here seems weird. We rely on EXPAND-EFFECTIVE-METHOD-FUNCTION
+ ;; recognizing any form whose operator is %NO-PRIMARY-METHOD
+ ;; as magical, and carefully surrounding it with a
+ ;; LAMBDA form which binds .ARGS. But...
+ ;; 1. That seems fragile, because the magicalness of
+ ;; %NO-PRIMARY-METHOD forms is scattered around
+ ;; the system. So it could easily be broken by
+ ;; locally-plausible maintenance changes like,
+ ;; e.g., using the APPLY expression above.
+ ;; 2. That seems buggy w.r.t. to MOPpish tricks in
+ ;; user code, e.g.
+ ;; (DEFMETHOD COMPUTE-EFFECTIVE-METHOD :AROUND (...)
+ ;; `(PROGN ,(CALL-NEXT-METHOD) (INCF *MY-CTR*)))
+ `(%no-primary-method ',generic-function .args.))
((null around) main-method)
(t
`(call-method ,(car around)
(,@(cdr around) (make-method ,main-method))))))))
+
+(defmethod invalid-qualifiers ((gf generic-function)
+ (combin short-method-combination)
+ method)
+ (let ((qualifiers (method-qualifiers method))
+ (type (method-combination-type combin)))
+ (let ((why (cond
+ ((null qualifiers) "has no qualifiers")
+ ((cdr qualifiers) "has too many qualifiers")
+ (t (aver (and (neq (car qualifiers) type)
+ (neq (car qualifiers) :around)))
+ "has an invalid qualifier"))))
+ (invalid-method-error
+ method
+ "The method ~S on ~S ~A.~%~
+ The method combination type ~S was defined with the~%~
+ short form of DEFINE-METHOD-COMBINATION and so requires~%~
+ all methods have either the single qualifier ~S or the~%~
+ single qualifier :AROUND."
+ method gf why type type))))
\f
;;;; long method combinations
(setf (gethash type *long-method-combination-functions*) function)
(when old-method (remove-method #'find-method-combination old-method))
(add-method #'find-method-combination new-method)
+ (setf (random-documentation type 'method-combination) doc)
type))
(defmethod compute-effective-method ((generic-function generic-function)
(return (nconc (frob required nr nreq)
(frob optional no nopt)
values)))))
+
projects / sbcl.git / blobdiff