Assorted patches

Alessio Stalla alessiostalla at
Fri Aug 12 08:35:27 UTC 2016

Thanks! It's especially great for me to see someone working on
jnew-runtime-class :) I hope your patches get incorporated.
My plans for runtime-class were, besides supporting constructors and
polishing the whole thing, to provide a macro on top of it (say,
define-java-class) that would generate the class at macroexpansion time and
somehow hook with the compiler to include the class in compilation output
somewhere. The ultimate goal being generating a jar with classes
implemented in Lisp accessible to Java and other JVM languages. That would
be really cool, although I never properly evaluated the feasibility.

Keep up the good work!

On 9 August 2016 at 21:46, Olof-Joachim Frahm <olof at> wrote:

> Hi list,
> attached are some patches (from [1]) that have been sitting around for a
> while; one is more of a work in progress, but it would still be great to
> know if it's at least going in the right direction.
> - 0001 Fixes an annoying issue I had where imported nested classes (with
>   the dollar sign in their name) weren't found via JSS.
> - 0002 Adds the `external-only` option as seen in SBCL to `apropos`,
>   because it's convenient.
> - 0005 Adds support for setting the `file-position` on
>   `string-output-stream`s.  Might be somewhat obscure, but I stumbled
>   upon it in some situation.
> The next one could use some comments as well, but I consider it pretty
> well working:
> - 0003 Adds a hook and simple machinery to support multiple internal
>   disassembler backends.  At the moment I've added the ObjectWeb ASM
>   one and kept the existing JAD call.  Should this somehow add an ASDF
>   system to support loading of those libraries via Maven?  At the moment
>   a user has to have the matching JARs in their classpath for it to
>   work.
> Now the one that is not nearly done is 0004 which attempts to fix some
> of the issues with `jnew-runtime-class`, in particular working custom
> constructors.  Now I've noticed that that's a *big* topic, so this is
> just a starting point.  I'm deliberating ways of supporting a direct
> `super` call too, that includes fixing the supermethod calls that are
> still in the code.
> Let me know what you think, best regards,
> Olof
> [1]:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the armedbear-devel mailing list