-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 21
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
hash p write pathname #1612
hash p write pathname #1612
Conversation
I closed #1611 since it was included in this PR, and you will need both. This isn't changing the implementation, just adding the #P reader macro. |
Presumably this doesn't affect reading the old |
If there were any #.(PATHNAME "string") around, they would read in no problem. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I believe loading this file 'ALLPROP and remaking it would fix the duplicate COMS issue.
@@ -503,18 +505,59 @@ | |||
(ADDTOVAR LAMA CL:ENOUGH-NAMESTRING CL:HOST-NAMESTRING FILE-NAME CL:MERGE-PATHNAMES PATHNAME | |||
%%PRINT-DIRECTORY-COMPONENT CL:MAKE-PATHNAME %%PRINT-PATHNAME) | |||
) | |||
(PRETTYCOMPRINT CMLPATHNAMECOMS) | |||
|
|||
(RPAQQ CMLPATHNAMECOMS |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This seems to duplicate the RPAQQ of the CMLPATHNAMECOMS earlier in the file...?
The duplication of CMLPATHNAMESCOMS in this case is a leftover from Interlisp-10, where the compiled code for calling a lambda-nospread function (LAMBDA N ... (ARG N 1) ...) was different than calling a spread. It is still needed for NLAMBDA's. |
OK, but I don't understand how having the exact same RPAQQ to set the CMLPATHNAMECOMS twice in different places in the file affects how lambda no-spread and nlambdas are compiled. Can you enlighten me? |
And this was a newly introduced change - it was apparently OK before the addition of |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM.
do reading first