Re: GSOC | Extending Common Lisp support

[Jamison Hope <jrh at theptrgroup dot com>]

On Jun 4, 2012, at 12:42 AM, Per Bothner wrote:

> This seems cleaner:
>
>        Declaration decl = tr.lookup(name,  
> Language.FUNCTION_NAMESPACE);
>        ReferenceExp rexp = new ReferenceExp(name, decl);
>        rexp.setProcedureName(true);
>
> I do think doing setProcedureName is reasonable also when we
> find the declaration.  Even if the flag isn't needed, it just
> seems more consistent.

Agreed. If the lookup fails, then rexp.binding will just be null, which
is the same situation we had before.

> > Is that a valid change to make?
>
> Seems reasonable.
>
> > I *think* that calling tr.lookup() from
> > within function.rewriteForm() will do the appropriate lexical search,
> > but I'm still a little fuzzy about what's supposed to happen when  
> > in the
> > various Syntax methods.
>
> You think *I'm* not a little fuzzy on what's supposed to happen? :-)

Good thing we've got Charles around to figure everything out for us now!

Here's a patch with my changes to defun.java, defvar.java, and  
function.java
(and a ChangeLog entry). Now I think I can go back to doing a test  
script..

--
Jamison Hope
The PTR Group
www.theptrgroup.com

Attachment: gnu-commonlisp-lang.patch
Description: Binary data