Re: missing methods

Christopher Stacy <[email protected]> Fri, 3 Apr 2026 16:44:49 -0400
Newsgroups gmane.lisp.steel-bank.general
Message-ID <[email protected]>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--===============8899224833824024175==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------sQlMaoACKm3m6EAZe3PvnSOs"
Content-Language: en-US

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------sQlMaoACKm3m6EAZe3PvnSOs
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 4/3/26 11:48 AM, Stas Boukarev wrote:
/paraphrasing: maybe turn on debugging?/

Ladies and Gentlemen, We Have A Winner.
Stas Boukarev!
/(* In the unlikely event you didn't already know he was a winner....)/

I was about to go see if ASDF had a keyword that turns on those flags, 
but then his suggestion came in and I just went and set them like Stas 
suggested. Probably more reliable that way, anyway. Thank You, Stas. The 
problem was then solved and fixed in the source code in under 3 seconds 
after seeing the verbose compiler output.

I can't believe how dumb this one is. And now that I think back, I 
/have/ seen something like it before, although I can't remember the 
exact details. (It might have even been this same thing. Too long ago, 
but rings a bell.)

The lesson here is to think of simple things, when very fundamental 
things seem inexplicably borked. This is a personal vulnerability of 
mine, and not the first time I have fallen victim to myself this way. A 
CLOS method doesn't work and my first thought is: "Did I forget 
something about CLOS?" Followed by: "No, it's supposed to work like I 
think. So... is CLOS broken?" And I begin imagining all the things that 
could go wrong based on every CLOS implementation I ever looked at. Most 
of which are based on PCL, and none of which I've truly studied in depth 
(ie. not to the point I could re-create them just off the top of my 
head). The mind whirls. Then it quickly turns to contamination of the 
compile-time environment, and I go looking for anything I (or any 
libraries) might have possibly done to mess that up. Or maybe there is a 
bug in the compiler itself. Down all the rabbit holes of disbelief and 
panic.

Even though the whole time, I am thinking, "Chris, you idiot, this has 
to be something you did, and it's probably simple." But there's too much 
bias about it being a bug, and I just don't SEE anything wrong with my 
code. I've looked at this code a hundred times and haven't seen anything 
wrong with it! Ahem.

In my lame defense, the last time I reported a bug in a CLOS 
implementation -- a case similar to this -- it was in fact the CLOS 
implementation that was quite broken. But don't worry, that was in 
emacs-lisp. Back when I was originally hoping to have 
cross-compatibility. And it was part of this same project. I got pretty 
far there but eventually punted to CL-only. And I guess that experience 
was a factor in my bias this time.

Now we know the bug is here. That it has taken human form. Somehow, 
cstacy must convince a disbelieving world that the nightmare has already 
begun.

Have you guessed what it was, yet?

If not, here's the big hint: I am on a standard American QWERTY keyboard.

Second huge hint: It is SOooo obvious, and I did actually already look 
for a much more complex, but even more obvious, similar mistake. Not 
finding that, I didn't think of the most trivial version. Because I was 
looking for something intentional I might have done wrong. Rather than 
something I never remotely intended.

READ this far, and still don't know what it was? I am ambivalent about 
eliciting an educational list of responses on this mailing list, so I 
will spill the beans here. (Too bad there's no reasonable way to cover 
this up and uncover it with a click.) I'll just leave you with the 
following quote:

;; This next piece of code is tricky.
'; Here it comes.
;; You'll love this.

(wtf)

Thanks again!

PS. Would a text-based language's compiler (or linter) have noticed this 
mistake, where Lisp doesn't see it because of READ?





--------------sQlMaoACKm3m6EAZe3PvnSOs
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 4/3/26 11:48 AM, Stas Boukarev
      wrote:<br>
      <i>paraphrasing: maybe turn on debugging?</i><br>
      <br>
      Ladies and Gentlemen, We Have A Winner.<br>
      Stas Boukarev!<br>
      <font size="1"><i>(* In the unlikely event you didn't already know
          he was a winner....)</i></font><br>
      <br>
      I was about to go see if ASDF had a keyword that turns on those
      flags, but then his suggestion came in and I just went and set
      them like Stas suggested. Probably more reliable that way, anyway.
      Thank You, Stas. The problem was then solved and fixed in the
      source code in under 3 seconds after seeing the verbose compiler
      output.<br>
      <br>
      I can't believe how dumb this one is. And now that I think back, I
      <i>have</i> seen something like it before, although I can't
      remember the exact details. (It might have even been this same
      thing. Too long ago, but rings a bell.)<br>
      <br>
      The lesson here is to think of simple things, when very
      fundamental things seem inexplicably borked. This is a personal
      vulnerability of mine, and not the first time I have fallen victim
      to myself this way. A CLOS method doesn't work and my first
      thought is: "Did I forget something about CLOS?" Followed by: "No,
      it's supposed to work like I think. So... is CLOS broken?" And I
      begin imagining all the things that could go wrong based on every
      CLOS implementation I ever looked at. Most of which are based on
      PCL, and none of which I've truly studied in depth (ie. not to the
      point I could re-create them just off the top of my head). The
      mind whirls. Then it quickly turns to contamination of the
      compile-time environment, and I go looking for anything I (or any
      libraries) might have possibly done to mess that up. Or maybe
      there is a bug in the compiler itself. Down all the rabbit holes
      of disbelief and panic.<br>
      <br>
      Even though the whole time, I am thinking, "Chris, you idiot, this
      has to be something you did, and it's probably simple." But
      there's too much bias about it being a bug, and I just don't SEE
      anything wrong with my code. I've looked at this code a hundred
      times and haven't seen anything wrong with it! Ahem.<br>
      <br>
      In my lame defense, the last time I reported a bug in a CLOS
      implementation -- a case similar to this -- it was in fact the
      CLOS implementation that was quite broken. But don't worry, that
      was in emacs-lisp. Back when I was originally hoping to have
      cross-compatibility. And it was part of this same project. I got
      pretty far there but eventually punted to CL-only. And I guess
      that experience was a factor in my bias this time.<br>
      <br>
    </div>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">Now we know the bug is here. That it
      has taken human form. Somehow, cstacy must convince a disbelieving
      world that the nightmare has already begun.<br>
      <br>
      Have you guessed what it was, yet?<br>
      <br>
      If not, here's the big hint: I am on a standard American QWERTY
      keyboard.<br>
      <br>
      Second huge hint: It is SOooo obvious, and I did actually already
      look for a much more complex, but even more obvious, similar
      mistake. Not finding that, I didn't think of the most trivial
      version. Because I was looking for something intentional I might
      have done wrong. Rather than something I never remotely intended.<br>
      <br>
      READ this far, and still don't know what it was? I am ambivalent
      about eliciting an educational list of responses on this mailing
      list, so I will spill the beans here. (Too bad there's no
      reasonable way to cover this up and uncover it with a click.) I'll
      just leave you with the following quote:</div>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
    </div>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix"><font face="Monaco" size="1">;; This
        next piece of code is tricky.</font><br>
      <font face="Monaco" size="1">'; Here it comes.</font><br>
      <font face="Monaco" size="1">;; You'll love this.</font><br>
      <br>
      <font face="Monaco" size="1">(wtf)</font><br>
      <br>
      Thanks again!<br>
      <br>
      PS. Would a text-based language's compiler (or linter) have
      noticed this mistake, where Lisp doesn't see it because of READ?<br>
      <br>
      <br>
      <br>
      <br>
    </div>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
    </div>
  </body>
</html>

--------------sQlMaoACKm3m6EAZe3PvnSOs--


--===============8899224833824024175==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline


--===============8899224833824024175==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

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

--===============8899224833824024175==--