Re: [Sbcl-devel] Bug 106 (COMPLEX type specifiers)

[Christophe R. <cs...@ca...>]

On Sun, Oct 28, 2001 at 01:04:58PM -0600, William Harold Newman wrote:
> > Hope this helps,
> 
> Thank you. Beyond my initial remark above, though, I think I'm going
> to ignore this one until after sbcl-0.7.0, since at this point my cup
> of things that might make my brain explode runneth over.

Fair enough. Just to add to the general confusion on this issue, I've
since thought of a case that my patch arguably handles incorrectly;
feeding it
'(COMPLEX (MEMBER 1 1.5)) will return (effectively):
(OR (COMPLEX RATIONAL) (COMPLEX SINGLE-FLOAT))
where the answer should probably be
(COMPLEX REAL)

Oh, and UNION-TYPE doesn't seem to remove the NULL type in
canonicalization. Just some food for thought...

> (Hopefully 0.7.0 won't take forever. The only hard things I plan to do
> are finish fixing DEFSTRUCT and make sure %COMPILE doesn't totally
> screw up debugging data. How hard can that be?:-|)

Great! :-)

Christophe
-- 
Jesus College, Cambridge, CB5 8BL                           +44 1223 510 299
http://www-jcsu.jesus.cam.ac.uk/~csr21/                  (defun pling-dollar 
(str schar arg) (first (last +))) (make-dispatch-macro-character #\! t)
(set-dispatch-macro-character #\! #\$ #'pling-dollar)