[cells-devel] Next Steps

[Kenny Tilton]

Thomas F. Burdick wrote:

>Kenny Tilton writes:
>
> > (b) eliminate the check for looping in which one setf of a cell leads 
> > back to setf of the same cell (the scroll bar scenario). I will leave 
> > the code behind in case I decide to simply enhance cycle detection as 
> > opposed to wiping it out entirely.
>
>I think The Right Thing is to allow looping by default, assuming that
>the programmer knows what they're doing,
>
done.

> and to be able to optionally
>declare a certain cell to be non-cyclic
>
for debugging? ie, How are non-cyclic cells to be handled?

Scrollbars want zero revisits, the 6502 assembler wanted one. But this 
is irrelevant since they do not need to be non-cyclic. Both work 
unrestricted because they coast to a stop naturally, converging on one 
stable value.

So what case can you think of for non-cyclic? And then should there be a 
cyclep test, to fully generalize the mechanism? It could be TRUE, FALSE, 
or a custom function.

kt

-- 
Cells? Cello?: http://www.common-lisp.net/project/cells/
Cells-Gtk?: http://www.common-lisp.net/project/cells-gtk/
Why Lisp? http://lisp.tech.coop/RtL%20Highlight%20Film

"Doctor, I wrestled with reality for forty years, and I am happy to state that I finally won out over it." -- Elwood P. Dowd