From bd494c3bf560c4178f0ec8405b197e3ad0746ed9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Stas Boukarev Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2013 17:39:50 +0400 Subject: [PATCH] Adjust the recent defmethod change. (compile-or-load-defgeneric name) doesn't need the full eval-when repertoire, only :compile-toplevel and :execute. :compile-toplevel for subsequent forms and :execute for references within the body of defmethod to itself. :load-toplevel is not needed since when the FASLs are loaded no further processing is performed, this avoids the size increase of the resulting FASLs. --- src/pcl/boot.lisp | 64 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------- 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/pcl/boot.lisp b/src/pcl/boot.lisp index b324b84..6a8cc46 100644 --- a/src/pcl/boot.lisp +++ b/src/pcl/boot.lisp @@ -322,38 +322,40 @@ bootstrapping. (multiple-value-bind (qualifiers lambda-list body) (parse-defmethod args) `(progn - (eval-when (:compile-toplevel :load-toplevel :execute) + (eval-when (:compile-toplevel :execute) + ;; :compile-toplevel is needed for subsequent forms + ;; :execute is needed for references to itself inside the body (compile-or-load-defgeneric ',name)) - ;; KLUDGE: this double expansion is quite a monumental - ;; workaround: it comes about because of a fantastic interaction - ;; between the processing rules of CLHS 3.2.3.1 and the - ;; bizarreness of MAKE-METHOD-LAMBDA. - ;; - ;; MAKE-METHOD-LAMBDA can be called by the user, and if the - ;; lambda itself doesn't refer to outside bindings the return - ;; value must be compileable in the null lexical environment. - ;; However, the function must also refer somehow to the - ;; associated method object, so that it can call NO-NEXT-METHOD - ;; with the appropriate arguments if there is no next method -- - ;; but when the function is generated, the method object doesn't - ;; exist yet. - ;; - ;; In order to resolve this issue, we insert a literal cons cell - ;; into the body of the method lambda, return the same cons cell - ;; as part of the second (initargs) return value of - ;; MAKE-METHOD-LAMBDA, and a method on INITIALIZE-INSTANCE fills - ;; in the cell when the method is created. However, this - ;; strategy depends on having a fresh cons cell for every method - ;; lambda, which (without the workaround below) is skewered by - ;; the processing in CLHS 3.2.3.1, which permits implementations - ;; to macroexpand the bodies of EVAL-WHEN forms with both - ;; :COMPILE-TOPLEVEL and :LOAD-TOPLEVEL only once. The - ;; expansion below forces the double expansion in those cases, - ;; while expanding only once in the common case. - (eval-when (:load-toplevel) - (%defmethod-expander ,name ,qualifiers ,lambda-list ,body)) - (eval-when (:execute) - (%defmethod-expander ,name ,qualifiers ,lambda-list ,body))))) + ;; KLUDGE: this double expansion is quite a monumental + ;; workaround: it comes about because of a fantastic interaction + ;; between the processing rules of CLHS 3.2.3.1 and the + ;; bizarreness of MAKE-METHOD-LAMBDA. + ;; + ;; MAKE-METHOD-LAMBDA can be called by the user, and if the + ;; lambda itself doesn't refer to outside bindings the return + ;; value must be compileable in the null lexical environment. + ;; However, the function must also refer somehow to the + ;; associated method object, so that it can call NO-NEXT-METHOD + ;; with the appropriate arguments if there is no next method -- + ;; but when the function is generated, the method object doesn't + ;; exist yet. + ;; + ;; In order to resolve this issue, we insert a literal cons cell + ;; into the body of the method lambda, return the same cons cell + ;; as part of the second (initargs) return value of + ;; MAKE-METHOD-LAMBDA, and a method on INITIALIZE-INSTANCE fills + ;; in the cell when the method is created. However, this + ;; strategy depends on having a fresh cons cell for every method + ;; lambda, which (without the workaround below) is skewered by + ;; the processing in CLHS 3.2.3.1, which permits implementations + ;; to macroexpand the bodies of EVAL-WHEN forms with both + ;; :COMPILE-TOPLEVEL and :LOAD-TOPLEVEL only once. The + ;; expansion below forces the double expansion in those cases, + ;; while expanding only once in the common case. + (eval-when (:load-toplevel) + (%defmethod-expander ,name ,qualifiers ,lambda-list ,body)) + (eval-when (:execute) + (%defmethod-expander ,name ,qualifiers ,lambda-list ,body))))) (defmacro %defmethod-expander (name qualifiers lambda-list body &environment env) -- 1.7.10.4