X-Git-Url: http://repo.macrolet.net/gitweb/?a=blobdiff_plain;f=src%2Fpcl%2Fboot.lisp;h=f141b1d2ffb0190531a2f1da56358d41d1936249;hb=3c5609fe910bae51ff885c8cfd4be879151e7489;hp=40c13b4e63dfa2e807d932d86752950424cfda12;hpb=de393e0d20912200278b4e5666e3445fec3b46ba;p=sbcl.git diff --git a/src/pcl/boot.lisp b/src/pcl/boot.lisp index 40c13b4..f141b1d 100644 --- a/src/pcl/boot.lisp +++ b/src/pcl/boot.lisp @@ -239,7 +239,7 @@ bootstrapping. (compile-or-load-defgeneric ',fun-name)) (load-defgeneric ',fun-name ',lambda-list ,@initargs) ,@(mapcar #'expand-method-definition methods) - #',fun-name)))) + (fdefinition ',fun-name))))) (defun compile-or-load-defgeneric (fun-name) (proclaim-as-fun-name fun-name) @@ -263,18 +263,18 @@ bootstrapping. :definition-source `((defgeneric ,fun-name) ,*load-pathname*) initargs)) -;;; As per section 3.4.2 of the ANSI spec, generic function lambda -;;; lists have some special limitations, which we check here. +(define-condition generic-function-lambda-list-error + (reference-condition simple-program-error) + () + (:default-initargs :references (list '(:ansi-cl :section (3 4 2))))) + (defun check-gf-lambda-list (lambda-list) (flet ((ensure (arg ok) (unless ok - (error - ;; (s/invalid/non-ANSI-conforming/ because the old PCL - ;; implementation allowed this, so people got used to - ;; it, and maybe this phrasing will help them to guess - ;; why their program which worked under PCL no longer works.) - "~@" - arg lambda-list)))) + (error 'generic-function-lambda-list-error + :format-control + "~@" + :format-arguments (list arg lambda-list))))) (multiple-value-bind (required optional restp rest keyp keys allowp auxp aux morep more-context more-count) (parse-lambda-list lambda-list) @@ -437,14 +437,14 @@ bootstrapping. (mname `(,(if (eq (cadr initargs-form) :function) 'method 'fast-method) ,name ,@qualifiers ,specls)) - (mname-sym (intern (let ((*print-pretty* nil) - ;; (We bind *PACKAGE* to - ;; KEYWORD here as a way to - ;; force symbols to be printed - ;; with explicit package - ;; prefixes.) - (*package* *keyword-package*)) - (format nil "~S" mname))))) + (mname-sym (let ((*print-pretty* nil) + ;; (We bind *PACKAGE* to KEYWORD here + ;; as a way to force symbols to be + ;; printed with explicit package + ;; prefixes.) + (target *package*) + (*package* *keyword-package*)) + (format-symbol target "~S" mname)))) `(progn (defun ,mname-sym ,(cadr fn-lambda) ,@(cddr fn-lambda)) @@ -460,7 +460,7 @@ bootstrapping. `(list ,@(mapcar (lambda (specializer) (if (consp specializer) ``(,',(car specializer) - ,,(cadr specializer)) + ,,(cadr specializer)) `',specializer)) specializers)) unspecialized-lambda-list @@ -502,7 +502,6 @@ bootstrapping. (declare (ignore env)) (multiple-value-bind (parameters unspecialized-lambda-list specializers) (parse-specialized-lambda-list lambda-list) - (declare (ignore parameters)) (multiple-value-bind (real-body declarations documentation) (parse-body body) (values `(lambda ,unspecialized-lambda-list @@ -670,8 +669,9 @@ bootstrapping. ;; it can avoid run-time type dispatch overhead, ;; which can be a huge win for Python.) ;; - ;; FIXME: Perhaps these belong in - ;; ADD-METHOD-DECLARATIONS instead of here? + ;; KLUDGE: when I tried moving these to + ;; ADD-METHOD-DECLARATIONS, things broke. No idea + ;; why. -- CSR, 2004-06-16 ,@(mapcar #'parameter-specializer-declaration-in-defmethod parameters specializers))) @@ -717,7 +717,8 @@ bootstrapping. ((eq p '&aux) (return nil)))))) (multiple-value-bind - (walked-lambda call-next-method-p closurep next-method-p-p) + (walked-lambda call-next-method-p closurep + next-method-p-p setq-p) (walk-method-lambda method-lambda required-parameters env @@ -758,6 +759,7 @@ bootstrapping. :call-next-method-p ,call-next-method-p :next-method-p-p ,next-method-p-p + :setq-p ,setq-p ;; we need to pass this along ;; so that NO-NEXT-METHOD can ;; be given a suitable METHOD @@ -820,8 +822,9 @@ bootstrapping. (or ,cnm-args ,',method-args)))) (next-method-p-body () `(not (null .next-method.))) - (with-rebound-original-args ((call-next-method-p) &body body) - (declare (ignore call-next-method-p)) + (with-rebound-original-args ((call-next-method-p setq-p) + &body body) + (declare (ignore call-next-method-p setq-p)) `(let () ,@body))) ,@body)) @@ -1114,8 +1117,8 @@ bootstrapping. `(,rest-arg))))))) (next-method-p-body () `(not (null ,',next-method-call))) - (with-rebound-original-args ((cnm-p) &body body) - (if cnm-p + (with-rebound-original-args ((cnm-p setq-p) &body body) + (if (or cnm-p setq-p) `(let ,',rebindings (declare (ignorable ,@',all-params)) ,@body) @@ -1123,11 +1126,11 @@ bootstrapping. ,@body))) (defmacro bind-lexical-method-functions - ((&key call-next-method-p next-method-p-p + ((&key call-next-method-p next-method-p-p setq-p closurep applyp method-name-declaration) &body body) (cond ((and (null call-next-method-p) (null next-method-p-p) - (null closurep) (null applyp)) + (null closurep) (null applyp) (null setq-p)) `(let () ,@body)) (t `(call-next-method-bind @@ -1139,7 +1142,7 @@ bootstrapping. ,@(and next-method-p-p '((next-method-p () (next-method-p-body))))) - (with-rebound-original-args (,call-next-method-p) + (with-rebound-original-args (,call-next-method-p ,setq-p) ,@body)))))) (defmacro bind-args ((lambda-list args) &body body) @@ -1231,8 +1234,9 @@ bootstrapping. ; should be in the method definition (closurep nil) ; flag indicating that #'CALL-NEXT-METHOD ; was seen in the body of a method - (next-method-p-p nil)) ; flag indicating that NEXT-METHOD-P + (next-method-p-p nil) ; flag indicating that NEXT-METHOD-P ; should be in the method definition + (setq-p nil)) (flet ((walk-function (form context env) (cond ((not (eq context :eval)) form) ;; FIXME: Jumping to a conclusion from the way it's used @@ -1247,6 +1251,17 @@ bootstrapping. ((eq (car form) 'next-method-p) (setq next-method-p-p t) form) + ((eq (car form) 'setq) + ;; FIXME: this is possibly a little strong as + ;; conditions go. Ideally we would want to detect + ;; which, if any, of the method parameters are + ;; being set, and communicate that information to + ;; e.g. SPLIT-DECLARATIONS. However, the brute + ;; force method doesn't really cost much; a little + ;; loss of discrimination over IGNORED variables + ;; should be all. -- CSR, 2004-07-01 + (setq setq-p t) + form) ((and (eq (car form) 'function) (cond ((eq (cadr form) 'call-next-method) (setq call-next-method-p t) @@ -1283,7 +1298,8 @@ bootstrapping. (values walked-lambda call-next-method-p closurep - next-method-p-p))))) + next-method-p-p + setq-p))))) (defun generic-function-name-p (name) (and (legal-fun-name-p name) @@ -1420,10 +1436,10 @@ bootstrapping. ;; failing that, to use a special ;; symbol prefix denoting privateness. ;; -- WHN 19991201 - (intern (format nil "FAST-~A" - (car method-spec)) - *pcl-package*))) - ,@(cdr method-spec)))) + (format-symbol *pcl-package* + "FAST-~A" + (car method-spec)))) + ,@(cdr method-spec)))) (set-fun-name mff name) (unless mf (set-mf-property :name name))))) @@ -1931,7 +1947,7 @@ bootstrapping. (let ((method-class (getf ,all-keys :method-class '.shes-not-there.))) (unless (eq method-class '.shes-not-there.) (setf (getf ,all-keys :method-class) - (find-class method-class t ,env)))))) + (find-class method-class t ,env)))))) (defun real-ensure-gf-using-class--generic-function (existing @@ -2326,6 +2342,11 @@ bootstrapping. (declare (ignore ignore1 ignore2 ignore3)) required-parameters)) +(define-condition specialized-lambda-list-error + (reference-condition simple-program-error) + () + (:default-initargs :references (list '(:ansi-cl :section (3 4 3))))) + (defun parse-specialized-lambda-list (arglist &optional supplied-keywords (allowed-keywords '(&optional &rest &key &aux)) @@ -2336,22 +2357,21 @@ bootstrapping. ((eq arg '&aux) (values nil arglist nil nil)) ((memq arg lambda-list-keywords) - ;; Now, since we try to conform to ANSI, non-standard - ;; lambda-list-keywords should be treated as errors. + ;; non-standard lambda-list-keywords are errors. (unless (memq arg specialized-lambda-list-keywords) - (error 'simple-program-error + (error 'specialized-lambda-list-error :format-control "unknown specialized-lambda-list ~ keyword ~S~%" :format-arguments (list arg))) ;; no multiple &rest x &rest bla specifying (when (memq arg supplied-keywords) - (error 'simple-program-error + (error 'specialized-lambda-list-error :format-control "multiple occurrence of ~ specialized-lambda-list keyword ~S~%" :format-arguments (list arg))) ;; And no placing &key in front of &optional, either. (unless (memq arg allowed-keywords) - (error 'simple-program-error + (error 'specialized-lambda-list-error :format-control "misplaced specialized-lambda-list ~ keyword ~S~%" :format-arguments (list arg))) @@ -2374,7 +2394,7 @@ bootstrapping. (not (or (null (cadr lambda-list)) (memq (cadr lambda-list) specialized-lambda-list-keywords))))) - (error 'simple-program-error + (error 'specialized-lambda-list-error :format-control "in a specialized-lambda-list, excactly one ~ variable must follow &REST.~%"