On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 5:01 PM, Tobias C Rittweiler <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll
> I am greatly amazed at the improvements in type propagation -- which stillI'm not following. What's wrong in the call to REPLACE?
> can not be called liked that, but which does some minimal type inference --,
> probably because the stupid algorithm catches quite many problems already.
> However, precisely due to the simplicity of the current algorithms, one
> thing that may be a showstopper is that there is code around that looks like
> (when (stringp foo)
> (replace foo faa ...))
> I am a bit lost here. On the one hand this is valid Lisp, even if FOO is
> inferred to have, say, an integer type. However the compiler will see that
> REPLACE gets arguments of the wrong type and will complain.
The compiler can infer that FOO inside the branch must have type STRING.
My point is that the call to REPLACE is never questionable. The WHEN