From: William Harold Newman <william.newman@ai...> - 2003-04-24 15:46:49
On Thu, Apr 24, 2003 at 11:59:14AM +0400, Alexey Dejneka wrote:
> Current SBCL compiler signals STYLE-WARNING when sees a call of an
> undefined function; the reason is that the function may be defined
> later. But a conforming program is not allowed to define functions in
> the CL package; the attached patch makes the compiler to issue a full
> warning for calling of undefined "standard" function. What do you
> think about it?
It sounds good to me. It seems very logical, and (as I think someone
mentioned in #lisp) it has the nice consequence that the common error
of using DECLARE instead of DECLAIM at toplevel is caught promptly.
William Harold Newman <william.newman@...>
I was going to correct that to "shows his grammar nazi jackboots off"
but that would be ending a sentence with a preposition.
-- dan_b on <http://tunes.org/~nef/logs/lisp/03.02.05>
PGP key fingerprint 85 CE 1C BA 79 8D 51 8C B9 25 FB EE E0 C3 E5 7C