Processing of Defining Macros

[Sam S. <sd...@gn...>]

http://clhs.lisp.se/Body/03_bcaa.htm:
>> It is not specified whether definitions made available in the
>> compilation environment are available in the evaluation environment, nor
>> is it specified whether they are available in subsequent compilation
>> units or subsequent invocations of the compiler.

Some macros form Figure 3-8 leak into the evaluation environment and
some do not.

Specifically, declaim, defvar, defconstant, defparameter do NOT.
defmacro, defclass, defstruct, defpackage DO.

This kinda makes sense - except for declaim which I think should be in
the second list.

On the second thought, I think this is not quite right.
Compiling a file should have an effect of loading its lib file.
E.g., in a single session, using an example from
http://clisp.org/impnotes/require.html,

(compile-file "foo")

will _not_ define variables defined in "foo", but

(compile-file "bar")

will load "foo.lib" (because of `(require "foo")` in "bar.lisp") and
thus will define the variables.

Bruno, can you elaborate on these design decisions?
(possibly by committing a patch to doc/impbody.xml)
Do you think declaim should be in the second list?

Thanks.

-- 
Sam Steingold (http://sds.podval.org/) on darwin Ns 10.3.1504
http://steingoldpsychology.com http://www.childpsy.net http://iris.org.il
https://ffii.org http://thereligionofpeace.com http://islamexposedonline.com
Lisp: its not just for geniuses anymore.