From: William H. N. <wil...@ai...> - 2001-06-25 16:06:34
|
On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 02:39:41PM +0200, Martin Atzmueller wrote: > I have made my patch for the comments in class.lisp to clarify > the behavior of the hierarchical-type patch a bit more verbose. > The attached patch supersedes the patch on sbcl-devel 2001-06-13. > > I think there was some not very well explained code, that seemed > dubious, but now this should be clear. Yes, thank you, I've merged the changes in sbcl-0.6.12.42. > (inherits #() :type simple-vector) > - ;; If inheritance is hierarchical, this is -1. If inheritance is not > + ;; If inheritance is not-hierarchical, this is -1. If inheritance is > ;; hierarchical, this is the inheritance depth, i.e. (LENGTH INHERITS). A noteworthy example of my commenting style -- quite explicit and absolutely wrong.:-( At least it should be better now.. -- William Harold Newman <wil...@ai...> pending stuff sbcl-devel: MNA tarball of CMU CL bug test cases PGP key fingerprint 85 CE 1C BA 79 8D 51 8C B9 25 FB EE E0 C3 E5 7C |