[slime-devel] the slime inspector

[Marco Baringer]

Martin Simmons <martin at xanalys.com> writes:

> 1) Why do you have both a DEFGENERIC and a DEFIMPLEMENTATION for
> SWANK-BACKEND:INSPECTED-PARTS?  Likewise, there are two real definitions of
> the SWANK-BACKEND:INSPECTED-PARTS method specializing on T.  Should it be
> removed from the backends?

those are both over sights. i'd just kill the definterface form at
this point.

> 2) Is it necessary to import CL symbols (e.g. METHOD) into SWANK-MOP?

no, but at the same time a lot of those symbols aren't neccessary for
the functionaliy the inspector offers, it was just easier to cut 'n
paste from the MOP spec than to sit down and decide exactly what
symbols we use. (this same arugments holds for find-class and
class-name).

-- 
-Marco
Ring the bells that still can ring.
Forget your perfect offering.
There is a crack in everything.
That's how the light gets in.
     -Leonard Cohen