Re: defstruct with by-order-of-argument constructor

>>>>> "Albert" == Albert Reiner <[email protected]> writes:

    Albert> Hi,
    Albert> using the CMU Common Lisp Snapshot 2005-11 (19C) on Linux x86, I get
    Albert> undesirable results for defstructs with b-o-a constructors like the
    Albert> following:

    Albert>   (defstruct (foobar
    Albert>                (:constructor make-foobar
    Albert>                              (xxx
    Albert>                               &key (aaa nil) (bbb nil)
    Albert>                               &aux
    Albert>                               (foobar-data xxx)
    Albert>                               (aaa (or aaa
    Albert>                                        (getf foobar-data :aaa)
    Albert>                                        1))
    Albert>                               (bbb (or bbb
    Albert>                                        (getf foobar-data :bbb)
    Albert>                                        (1+ aaa))))))
    Albert>     (aaa (required-argument) :type fixnum)
    Albert>     (bbb (required-argument) :type fixnum))

    Albert> The intent is to have a b-o-a constructor with keyword arguments with
    Albert> more complicated defaults; in reality, the binding for FOOBAR-DATA is
    Albert> a potentially expensive computation depending on XXX.

    Albert> I believe the above is valid CL (cf. CLHS 3.4.6), and Clisp in fact
    Albert> accepts it and produces the desired results:

Sorry for the long delay.

I think your analysis is correct.  I think we still need at least to
check the type is correct.  I just don't know exactly where that
should be done now, and how to make it actually happen.

I'll poke around some more soon.

Ray