From: Christophe R. <cs...@ca...> - 2006-05-24 08:17:48
|
Yaroslav Kavenchuk <kav...@je...> writes: > Many thanks for response. > > One question: > >> [ As a stylistic issue, the patches currently have too many sb-unicode >> reader-conditionals. For example, instead of having >> #!-sb-unicode 'simple-base-string #!+sb-unicode 'simple-string >> I'd prefer either just using: >> 'simple-string >> or: >> (deftype foo-string () >> #!-sb-unicode 'simple-base-string #!+sb-unicode >> 'simple-string) >> [...] >> 'foo-string > > > What it is more preferable? If simple-string is the right thing for a build with #!+sb-unicode, it is likely also to be the right thing for a build with #!-sb-unicode. The reason is that simple-string includes all array specializations of subtypes of character, including the somewhat pathological (simple-array nil (*)). If including that is right with sb-unicode, it is also right to include it without. Cheers, Christophe |