[slime-devel] the slime inspector

[Thomas Schilling]

marco <mb at bese.it> wrote:

>> because the inlined closure was modified in each loop. Dunno, if this
>> is a  bug or a feature or simply depends on the loop implementation
>> (in which  case it would probably also be a bug).
>
> no, this is exactly how things should work. closures close over
> bindings, not values. the "fix" was just to change the lambda to (let
> ((meth method)) (lambda ... meth ...)), so that a new binding is
> created for each lambda.

Yes, that's even shorter. In retrospect I agree that it's no bug (but a  
feature). I was just assuming that it worked correctly on SBCL and MCL. ;)

> structs have lots of implementation specific stuff about them. i think
> it'd be best to just implement (inspected-parts structure-class) in
> swank-allegro, swank-openmcl, etc.

I agree.

-ts