[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
structure type specifier
- To: Christopher Fry <cfry@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU>
- Subject: structure type specifier
- From: Robert W. Kerns <RWK@YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Date: Tue, 8 Dec 87 06:53 EST
- Cc: Common-Lisp@sail.stanford.edu
- In-reply-to: <871207222343.9.CFRY@JONES.AI.MIT.EDU>
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 87 22:23 EST
From: Christopher Fry <cfry@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU>
STRUCTURE is not a legal type specifier according to
CLtL p 43 table of type specifier symbols.
Seems awfully useful & natural to me.
Has CLtL been superceded? Did I miss some reference somewhere?
Similarly STRUCTUREP isn't a CL function.
Does anyone have a CL implementation without structurep or equivalent?
Actually, it doesn't seem "awfully useful & natural" to me.
Natural, yes, but since CLtL doesn't have any primitives
for dealing with structures at all, it doesn't seem incredibly
But that's the fault of CL, and not your idea. Symbolics CL
provides NAMED-STRUCTURE-P and the STRUCTURE type. Types
created by DEFSTRUCT are all subtypes of STRUCTURE.
If you know where to find them, there are also tools for decoding a