From: Ville Voutilainen <ville.voutilainen@gm...> - 2008-08-04 15:18:13
>> conditions is IMHO very useful. I wouldn't modify Interpreter to do the
>> same, though.
> It's not possible to change the behaviour of the interpreter, but you
> could wrap the interpreter's eval() to be safeEval() with the same
> trick that I did with safeFuncall().
I personally neither need nor want this wrapping by default. I'd like
to have it as an option, meaning that maybe the safeEval could
be exposed on the Java side for people who want that functionality.
I usually try to keep my lisp code portable - that means handling
conditions properly in lisp code and never depending on abcl to
map unhandled conditions. That way I can run the same lisp
code in environments where abcl is not present. Other people
may want more automation and java integration.