Re: finding an implementation of SWANK interface
Martin Simmons <[email protected]> Tue, 19 Dec 2017 14:21:26 GMT
| Newsgroups | gmane.lisp.slime.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Maybe something like this hack in the LispWorks backend could be generalized: https://github.com/slime/slime/blob/master/swank/lispworks.lisp#L60 __Martin >>>>> On Tue, 19 Dec 2017 16:29:18 +0300, 73budden said: > > Thanks for the feedback! > > Thanks for a feedback. > > ... Sadly, it had to be reverted because ran into SBCL's compiler lock. > > Perhaps you can come up with a solution? > > No. I'm trying to do some SBCL hacking, but I'm (yet) not experienced > enough to fix such things. The patch I suggested is extremely simple, > it works in SBCL and there is a good chance it would work on other CL > implementations too. It is not elegant, but for me it is still better > than grep. And I see no extreme difference between my patch showing > implementation as "defvar" and Helmut's one, which I guess shows > implementation as "defmethod". Anyway there's no explicit statement > that actually they are "definterface" and "defimplementation". I admit > my solution is essentially uglier, but it works while Helmut's does > not. > > Slightly better thing would be to show the exceprt from docstring > together with "defvar" and "defun", so that it would be clear that > "defvar" stands for "defimplementation". > > But I'm not sure I have the resources to implement that :) > > > 2017-12-19 14:56 GMT+03:00, Luís Oliveira <[email protected]>: > > Hi Budden, > > > > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 11:26 AM, 73budden . <[email protected]> wrote: > >> defun is for definterface, defvar is for defimplementation. This works > >> at least in SBCL, I guess it is handy. Patch is attached. This may > >> seem a bit ugly, but SBCL does not suggest a way to extend its > >> definition database with new classes, so I see no good way to go. > > > > Helmut implemented what seemed like an elegant solution to this issue > > back in 2014: > > <https://github.com/slime/slime/commit/74ef7010d79fad14db43d6ff989f177a7a8986b5> > > > > Sadly, it had to be reverted because ran into SBCL's compiler lock. > > <https://github.com/slime/slime/commit/f63fd440f1beeadd155b871f5d9fc8729c2dfc0d> > > > > Perhaps you can come up with a solution? Perhaps there's a way to > > force compilation of these methods ahead of time? Something else? > > > > -- > > Luís Oliveira > > http://kerno.org/~luis/ > > > >