[pro] [Q] introspecting setf expanders

[Pascal Costanza]

Just guessing: If you see that the writer form is a funcall to a setf function, you can then check with fboundp if such a function actually exists. This is probably a bit shaky, but maybe good enough for practical purposes?

Pascal

On 8 Oct 2012, at 16:56, Didier Verna <didier at lrde.epita.fr> wrote:

> Raymond Wiker <rwiker at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> #'get-setf-expansion, perhaps?
> 
>  Nope, because it gives you something by default.
> 
> CL-USER> (get-setf-expansion '(not-previously-defined))
> NIL
> NIL
> (#:NEW886)
> (FUNCALL #'(SETF NOT-PREVIOUSLY-DEFINED) #:NEW886)
> (NOT-PREVIOUSLY-DEFINED)
> 
> 
> -- 
> Resistance is futile. You will be jazzimilated.
> 
> Scientific site:   http://www.lrde.epita.fr/~didier
> Music (Jazz) site: http://www.didierverna.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> pro mailing list
> pro at common-lisp.net
> http://lists.common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro

--
Pascal Costanza