[slime-devel] Re: SWANK-BACKEND:FIND-DEFINITIONS -- return value specification.

[Tobias C. Rittweiler]

Helmut Eller <heller at common-lisp.net> writes:

> * Tobias C. Rittweiler [2008-02-24 21:06+0100] writes:
>
>> Helmut Eller <heller at common-lisp.net> writes:
>>
>>> Yes, that's a useful application.  I don't quite understand how
>>> FIND-DEFINITIONS can be used here because FIND-DEFINITIONS expects a
>>> (generalized) name as argument.  One possibility would be to use a
>>> (yet-to-be-invented) function, say FUNCTION-NAME, which returns the name
>>> of a function object and passing that name to FIND-DEFINITIONS.  But if
>>> we invent a FUNCTION-NAME function, we could just as well invent
>>> FUNCTION-SOURCE-LOCATION and CLASS-SOURCE-LOCATION, which would easier
>>> to use than FIND-DEFINITIONS.
>>
>> I decided to do this way, because SWANK-BACKEND:FUNCTION-NAME does in
>> fact already exist. And you can retrieve the name of structures and
>> classes via TYPE-OF.
>
> I guess that this will not fly for stuff like:
>
>   (setf (fdefinition 'foo) (lambda () ...))
>   (find-definition-for-thing #'foo)

Probably not. 

Do you prefer the explicit SOURCE-LOCATION machinery?

  -T.