SLIME + Named readtables
budden73 at gmail.com
Sat Aug 19 07:03:22 UTC 2017
Hi! Do you mean that in any case (in-readtable) form should have a
priority over *readtable-alist*? Let's speculate about it a bit.
Could the change break something? I guess no: if someone have this form in the
file, then it modifies *readtable-alist* already every time the file is loaded.
So it looks like this change can make no harm. I think we don't even
need exception list for now - just we don't need to alter named readtables
at all for this change. Does that sound like a truth?
If so, this is a part of what I had implemented already, so I can
start re-applying it as soon
as I find a time (in a several days).
2017-08-18 22:02 GMT+03:00, Luís Oliveira <luismbo at gmail.com>:
> Tracking in-readtable forms and passing the readtable designator along in
> evaluation/compilation requests sounds consensual. Let's start with that,
> what do you think?
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2017, 17:15 73budden . <budden73 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Good idea, but this PR does not implement my current suggestion. I
>> have to work on code for a while. Before I start, I'd like to know do
>> you (or does anyone) see any more issues with the solution described?
>> 2017-08-18 16:39 GMT+03:00, Luís Oliveira <luismbo at gmail.com>:
>> > On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 1:03 PM, 73budden . <budden73 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> Sorry, I didn't get what you meant :) Anyway, the quesion is still
>> >> open if the change suggested would break someone's things, so I hope
>> >> it is not a big harm to give more details.
>> > I suggest we move on to pull request #278 then. Maybe you can start by
>> > rebasing/merging against latest master?
>> > Cheers,
>> > --
>> > Luís Oliveira
>> > http://kerno.org/~luis/
More information about the slime-devel