Re: [Sbcl-devel] [Possible BUG]: Iteration variables are specified to be always used.

[Nikodemus S. <nik...@ra...>]

On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 8:21 PM, Tobias C. Rittweiler <tc...@fr...> wrote:

> The problem is that _consequences are unspecified_ for
>
>  (dotimes (i 100)
>    (declare (ignore i))
>    (print i))
>
> So other implementations may rightfully signal a style-warning for this,
> or even refuse compilation. So to get portably no style-warning, you'd
> have to write
>
>  (dotimes (i 100)
>    #+SBCL (declare (ignore i))
>    (print i))

I assume you meant (PRINT 'FOO). However,

 (dotimes (i 100)
   (declare (ignorable i))
   (print 'foo))

should do what you want -- that is, it should not signal a
style-warning anywhere.

> If you don't apply the patch, then at least make the behaviour
> consistent, and not a detail of the implementation. That is make
>
>  (dotimes (i 100) ..body..)
>
> expand to
>
>  (do ((#:G 0 (1+ #:G)))
>      ((>= #:G 10) nil)
>    (declare (type unsigned-byte #:G))
>    (LET ((I #:G))
>      ..body..))

Hmm...

Cheers,

 -- Nikodemus