X-Git-Url: http://repo.macrolet.net/gitweb/?a=blobdiff_plain;ds=sidebyside;f=src%2Fcode%2Fdefboot.lisp;h=e2bd2c25e4afd5d0f3843fce791435ae78791856;hb=2db3b6b4cb740d5b6512459c223859f747807b09;hp=48f1497662a53d7761d684bac0b1c69f9e3959f1;hpb=416152f084604094445a758ff399871132dff2bd;p=sbcl.git diff --git a/src/code/defboot.lisp b/src/code/defboot.lisp index 48f1497..e2bd2c2 100644 --- a/src/code/defboot.lisp +++ b/src/code/defboot.lisp @@ -47,22 +47,9 @@ (error "Vars is not a list of symbols: ~S" vars))) (defmacro-mundanely multiple-value-setq (vars value-form) - (cond ((null vars) - ;; The ANSI spec says that the primary value of VALUE-FORM must be - ;; returned. The general-case-handling code below doesn't do this - ;; correctly in the special case when there are no vars bound, so we - ;; handle this special case separately here. - (let ((g (gensym))) - `(multiple-value-bind (,g) ,value-form - ,g))) - ((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)) - vars temps) - ,(car temps)))) - (t (error "Vars is not a list of symbols: ~S" vars)))) + (unless (list-of-symbols-p vars) + (error "Vars is not a list of symbols: ~S" vars)) + `(values (setf (values ,@vars) ,value-form))) (defmacro-mundanely multiple-value-list (value-form) `(multiple-value-call #'list ,value-form)) @@ -72,21 +59,21 @@ ;;; COND defined in terms of IF (defmacro-mundanely cond (&rest clauses) (if (endp clauses) - nil - (let ((clause (first clauses))) - (if (atom clause) - (error "Cond clause is not a list: ~S" clause) - (let ((test (first clause)) - (forms (rest clause))) - (if (endp forms) - (let ((n-result (gensym))) - `(let ((,n-result ,test)) - (if ,n-result - ,n-result - (cond ,@(rest clauses))))) - `(if ,test - (progn ,@forms) - (cond ,@(rest clauses))))))))) + nil + (let ((clause (first clauses))) + (if (atom clause) + (error "COND clause is not a list: ~S" clause) + (let ((test (first clause)) + (forms (rest clause))) + (if (endp forms) + (let ((n-result (gensym))) + `(let ((,n-result ,test)) + (if ,n-result + ,n-result + (cond ,@(rest clauses))))) + `(if ,test + (progn ,@forms) + (cond ,@(rest clauses))))))))) ;;; other things defined in terms of COND (defmacro-mundanely when (test &body forms) @@ -144,7 +131,7 @@ ;;;; DEFUN ;;; Should we save the inline expansion of the function named NAME? -(defun inline-function-name-p (name) +(defun inline-fun-name-p (name) (or ;; the normal reason for saving the inline expansion (info :function :inlinep name) @@ -157,51 +144,44 @@ ;; (DEFUN FOO ..) ;; without a preceding ;; (DECLAIM (INLINE FOO)) - ;; what should we do with the old inline expansion? Overwriting it - ;; with the new definition seems like the only unsurprising choice. - (info :function :inline-expansion name))) + ;; what should we do with the old inline expansion when we see the + ;; new DEFUN? Overwriting it with the new definition seems like + ;; the only unsurprising choice. + (info :function :inline-expansion-designator name))) -;;; Now that we have the definition of MULTIPLE-VALUE-BIND, we can -;;; make a reasonably readable definition of DEFUN. (defmacro-mundanely defun (&environment env name args &body body) "Define a function at top level." #+sb-xc-host - (unless (symbol-package (function-name-block-name name)) + (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 ,(function-name-block-name name) - ,@forms))) - (want-to-inline ) + (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)) + #-sb-xc-host + (named-lambda `(named-lambda ,name ,@lambda-guts)) (inline-lambda - (cond (;; Does the user not even want to inline? - (not (inline-function-name-p name)) - nil) - (;; Does inlining look too hairy to handle? - (not (sb!c:lambda-independent-of-lexenv-p lambda env)) - (sb!c:maybe-compiler-note - "lexical environment too hairy, can't inline DEFUN ~S" - name) - nil) - (t - ;; FIXME: The only reason that we return - ;; LAMBDA-WITH-LEXENV instead of returning bare - ;; LAMBDA is to avoid modifying downstream code - ;; which expects LAMBDA-WITH-LEXENV. But the code - ;; here is the only code which feeds into the - ;; downstream code, and the generality of the - ;; interface is no longer used, so it'd make sense - ;; to simplify the interface instead of using the - ;; old general LAMBDA-WITH-LEXENV interface in this - ;; simplified way. - `(sb!c:lambda-with-lexenv - nil nil nil ; i.e. no DECLS, no MACROS, no SYMMACS - ,@(rest lambda)))))) + (when (inline-fun-name-p name) + ;; we want to attempt to inline, so complain if we can't + (or (sb!c:maybe-inline-syntactic-closure lambda env) + (progn + (#+sb-xc-host warn + #-sb-xc-host sb!c:maybe-compiler-note + "lexical environment too hairy, can't inline DEFUN ~S" + name) + nil))))) `(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) @@ -213,28 +193,27 @@ ;; 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 (defun %defun (name def doc) (declare (type function def)) (declare (type (or null simple-string doc))) - (/show0 "entering %DEFUN, name (or block name) = ..") - (/primitive-print (symbol-name (function-name-block-name name))) - (aver (legal-function-name-p name)) + (aver (legal-fun-name-p name)) ; should've been checked by DEFMACRO DEFUN (when (fboundp name) - (/show0 "redefining NAME") + (/show0 "redefining NAME in %DEFUN") (style-warn "redefining ~S in DEFUN" name)) - (/show0 "setting FDEFINITION") (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. - (/show0 "setting FDOCUMENTATION") - (if (and (consp name) (eq (first name) 'setf)) - (setf (fdocumentation (second name) 'setf) doc) - (setf (fdocumentation (the symbol name) 'function) doc))) - (/show0 "leaving %DEFUN") + (setf (fdocumentation name 'function) doc)) name) ;;;; DEFVAR and DEFPARAMETER @@ -251,7 +230,7 @@ `((unless (boundp ',var) (setq ,var ,val)))) ,@(when docp - `((funcall #'(setf fdocumentation) ',doc ',var 'variable))) + `((setf (fdocumentation ',var 'variable) ',doc ))) ',var)) (defmacro-mundanely defparameter (var val &optional (doc nil docp)) @@ -265,19 +244,16 @@ (declaim (special ,var)) (setq ,var ,val) ,@(when docp - ;; FIXME: The various FUNCALL #'(SETF FDOCUMENTATION) and - ;; other FUNCALL #'(SETF FOO) forms in the code should - ;; unbogobootstrapized back to ordinary SETF forms. - `((funcall #'(setf fdocumentation) ',doc ',var 'variable))) + `((setf (fdocumentation ',var 'variable) ',doc))) ',var)) ;;;; iteration constructs -;;; (These macros are defined in terms of a function DO-DO-BODY which +;;; (These macros are defined in terms of a function FROB-DO-BODY which ;;; is also used by SB!INT:DO-ANONYMOUS. Since these macros should not ;;; be loaded on the cross-compilation host, but SB!INT:DO-ANONYMOUS -;;; and DO-DO-BODY should be, these macros can't conveniently be in -;;; the same file as DO-DO-BODY.) +;;; and FROB-DO-BODY should be, these macros can't conveniently be in +;;; the same file as FROB-DO-BODY.) (defmacro-mundanely do (varlist endlist &body body) #!+sb-doc "DO ({(Var [Init] [Step])}*) (Test Exit-Form*) Declaration* Form* @@ -288,7 +264,7 @@ are evaluated as a PROGN, with the result being the value of the DO. A block named NIL is established around the entire expansion, allowing RETURN to be used as an alternate exit mechanism." - (do-do-body varlist endlist body 'let 'psetq 'do nil)) + (frob-do-body varlist endlist body 'let 'psetq 'do nil)) (defmacro-mundanely do* (varlist endlist &body body) #!+sb-doc "DO* ({(Var [Init] [Step])}*) (Test Exit-Form*) Declaration* Form* @@ -299,7 +275,7 @@ the Exit-Forms are evaluated as a PROGN, with the result being the value of the DO. A block named NIL is established around the entire expansion, allowing RETURN to be used as an laternate exit mechanism." - (do-do-body varlist endlist body 'let* 'setq 'do* nil)) + (frob-do-body varlist endlist body 'let* 'setq 'do* nil)) ;;; DOTIMES and DOLIST could be defined more concisely using ;;; destructuring macro lambda lists or DESTRUCTURING-BIND, but then @@ -308,46 +284,40 @@ ;;; defined that it looks as though it's worth just implementing them ;;; ASAP, at the cost of being unable to use the standard ;;; destructuring mechanisms. -(defmacro-mundanely dotimes (var-count-result &body body) - (multiple-value-bind ; to roll our own destructuring - (var count result) - (apply (lambda (var count &optional (result nil)) - (values var count result)) - var-count-result) - (cond ((numberp count) - `(do ((,var 0 (1+ ,var))) - ((>= ,var ,count) ,result) - (declare (type unsigned-byte ,var)) - ,@body)) - (t (let ((v1 (gensym))) - `(do ((,var 0 (1+ ,var)) (,v1 ,count)) - ((>= ,var ,v1) ,result) - (declare (type unsigned-byte ,var)) - ,@body)))))) -(defmacro-mundanely dolist (var-list-result &body body) - (multiple-value-bind ; to roll our own destructuring - (var list result) - (apply (lambda (var list &optional (result nil)) - (values var list result)) - var-list-result) - ;; We repeatedly bind the var instead of setting it so that we - ;; never have to give the var an arbitrary value such as NIL - ;; (which might conflict with a declaration). If there is a result - ;; form, we introduce a gratuitous binding of the variable to NIL - ;; without the declarations, then evaluate the result form in that - ;; environment. We spuriously reference the gratuitous variable, - ;; since since we don't want to use IGNORABLE on what might be a - ;; special var. +(defmacro-mundanely dotimes ((var count &optional (result nil)) &body body) + (cond ((numberp count) + `(do ((,var 0 (1+ ,var))) + ((>= ,var ,count) ,result) + (declare (type unsigned-byte ,var)) + ,@body)) + (t (let ((v1 (gensym))) + `(do ((,var 0 (1+ ,var)) (,v1 ,count)) + ((>= ,var ,v1) ,result) + (declare (type unsigned-byte ,var)) + ,@body))))) + +(defmacro-mundanely dolist ((var list &optional (result nil)) &body body) + ;; We repeatedly bind the var instead of setting it so that we never + ;; have to give the var an arbitrary value such as NIL (which might + ;; conflict with a declaration). If there is a result form, we + ;; introduce a gratuitous binding of the variable to NIL without the + ;; declarations, then evaluate the result form in that + ;; environment. We spuriously reference the gratuitous variable, + ;; since we don't want to use IGNORABLE on what might be a special + ;; var. + (multiple-value-bind (forms decls) (parse-body body nil) (let ((n-list (gensym))) - `(do ((,n-list ,list (cdr ,n-list))) - ((endp ,n-list) - ,@(if result - `((let ((,var nil)) - ,var - ,result)) - '(nil))) - (let ((,var (car ,n-list))) - ,@body))))) + `(do* ((,n-list ,list (cdr ,n-list))) + ((endp ,n-list) + ,@(if result + `((let ((,var nil)) + ,var + ,result)) + '(nil))) + (let ((,var (car ,n-list))) + ,@decls + (tagbody + ,@forms)))))) ;;;; miscellaneous @@ -356,26 +326,30 @@ (defmacro-mundanely psetq (&rest pairs) #!+sb-doc - "SETQ {var value}* + "PSETQ {var value}* Set the variables to the values, like SETQ, except that assignments happen in parallel, i.e. no assignments take place until all the forms have been evaluated." - ;; (This macro is used in the definition of DO, so we can't use DO in the - ;; definition of this macro without getting into confusing bootstrap issues.) - (prog ((lets nil) - (setqs nil) - (pairs pairs)) - :again - (when (atom (cdr pairs)) - (return `(let ,(nreverse lets) - (setq ,@(nreverse setqs)) - nil))) - (let ((gen (gensym))) - (setq lets (cons `(,gen ,(cadr pairs)) lets) - setqs (list* gen (car pairs) setqs) - pairs (cddr pairs))) - (go :again))) + ;; Given the possibility of symbol-macros, we delegate to PSETF + ;; which knows how to deal with them, after checking that syntax is + ;; compatible with PSETQ. + (do ((pair pairs (cddr pair))) + ((endp pair) `(psetf ,@pairs)) + (unless (symbolp (car pair)) + (error 'simple-program-error + :format-control "variable ~S in PSETQ is not a SYMBOL" + :format-arguments (list (car pair)))))) (defmacro-mundanely lambda (&whole whole args &body body) (declare (ignore args body)) `#',whole) + +(defmacro-mundanely named-lambda (&whole whole name args &body body) + (declare (ignore name args body)) + `#',whole) + +(defmacro-mundanely lambda-with-lexenv (&whole whole + declarations macros symbol-macros + &body body) + (declare (ignore declarations macros symbol-macros body)) + `#',whole)