[armedbear-devel] A clos patch for review

Ville Voutilainen ville.voutilainen at gmail.com
Mon Jul 27 23:59:12 UTC 2009

2009/7/28 Peter Tsenter <ptsenter at hotmail.com>:
> What I'm afraid of is there is a more fundamental issue here and this patch
> makes it even more hidden.

Well, if that's the case, we can always back it out. I understand the concern,
but I don't want to be paralyzed by such concerns.

> BTW, ANSI standard does not allow &aux in generic functions (sec 3.4.2), but
> this version of clos treats it as a legitimate citizen.
> Question: how do you explain why the patch does not catch
> reinitialize-instance.error.1? How does this case differ from the other 3?

I'm still investigating reinitialize-instance.error.1. It's a bit odd,
since it seems
to work correctly when the test is copy-pasted to the interpreter. I have no
proper explanation for it. If I had, it'd be fixed by now. :)

I urge you to remember that this is a foreign code base for all of us - we may
end up taking wrong steps occasionally while searching for the right thing to
fix. Be that as it may, I'm not all that worried about the param-check patch.
It's very small and relatively isolated.

More information about the armedbear-devel mailing list