Re: missing methods

Christopher Stacy <[email protected]> writes:

> The fact that just swapping the order of those two defmethods in the
> source file (and there's nothing between them) convinces me that this
> is some compiler bug.  I cannot imagine what it is.
>
> Alternatively, am I doing something so stupid I can't see it?

I don't think you're necessarily doing something stupid, but I also
don't expect that this is a compiler bug.  What I suspect instead is
that something is not quite as you describe it: something like a
misspelling of some name, *package* not being what you expect (or the
package later having its structure changed), some symbol not being
CL:<symbol> but something else...

(There used to be a warning for the most common error, which was a
misspelling of the method / generic function name: that would implicitly
define a new generic function, which we used to style-warn on.  You
could see whether that's the problem in your real system by counting the
number of generic functions in the system before and after the forms in
question.)

Since the simplest attempt to replicate your problem didn't work, could
you perhaps try reducing the full system to the smallest example which
demonstrates the problem?  Or else can you share it so that other people
can take a look?

Christophe