[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Argument lists
- To: Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU
- Subject: Re: Argument lists
- From: Alan Snyder <snyder%hplsny@hplabs.HP.COM>
- Date: Thursday, July 3, 1986 08:39:19
- Cc: common-lisp@su-ai.ARPA
- In-reply-to: Your message of 2-Jul-86 22:46:00
I'm still not convinced that speed is of critical importance here, but
it is clear to me that your perception of the need for this possibly
faster way of getting parameter info is stronger than my desire to
reduce the number of functions by one. Maybe you're right. I give up.
Let's add both FUNCTION-PARAMETERS and FUNCTION-PARAMETER-RANGE.
Can anybody not live with THAT?
Sorry, I tried, but I can't resist...
Isn't the proper "Common Lisp" solution to this issue to say that the compiler
ought to recognize calls to FUNCTION-PARAMETERS that only use the first two
values and, in implementations where FUNCTION-PARAMETER-RANGE would be faster,
convert those calls to calls on SYS:FUNCTION-PARAMETER-RANGE (now an internal