Re: change to standard-char-p in SBCL 2.4.2

Is the better code only for the out-of-line function or does it have any
difference when inlined?

On Sat, Mar 2, 2024 at 7:44 PM Douglas Katzman via Sbcl-help <
[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> On Sat, Mar 2, 2024 at 10:33 AM Matt Kaufmann <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I'm hoping that the change was inadvertent.
>>
> No, the change description says "Generate better code"
> I concur the NEWS file could have said "minor incompatible change" but did
> not.
>
>
>> Might that change be reversed in the next SBCL release?
>>
>> I personally don't find the argument that "If the compiler *could*
> generate worse code, then it *should* generate worse code" very
> compelling.
> It's an interesting assumption that ACL2 is making, considering that this
> is literally the purpose of having defined "generalized boolean" in the
> CLHS glossary.
>
>
>>
>> if there are other such examples I'd be very interested to learn of them.
>>
> Subsequently I would assume that any predicate returns a *generalized
> boolean*, e.g. PATHNAMEP and NUMBERP could return the input.
> Maybe the SBCL release maintainer will prefer strict boolean everywhere,
> and/or revert the one offending change, I don't know. But either way you'd
> be safe.
> _______________________________________________
> Sbcl-help mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sbcl-help
>

_______________________________________________
Sbcl-help mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sbcl-help