++ From: ········@porthos.rutgers.edu (Gadi )
++
++ I am using
++
++ Allegro CL 3.0.1.beta [sun4] (7/29/88 23:05)
++ Copyright (C) 1985-1988, Franz Inc., Berkeley, CA, USA
++
++ and am tring to setf array values using (apply #'aref array list))
++
++ (setq test (make-array '(2 2))) ; works
++ (apply #'aref test '(1 1)) ; works (returns the correct element)
++ (setf (apply #'aref test '(1 1)) 2) ; DOES NOT WORK.
++ This should work, as described in CLtL pg 95 and 291.
++
There is patch for this bug, which will be sent to you under separate
cover.
++ From: ·······@geneva.rutgers.edu (Charles Hedrick)
++
++ Unless you really don't know the number of dimensions of your array in
++ advance, (apply #'aref array list) sounds to me like it's going to be
++ inefficient. It's going to be particularly hard to produce good
++ compiled code for it. I agree that apply is better than eval, but not
++ by that much. At any rate, the inverse of aref in Allegro CL appears
++ to be excl::.inv-s-aref. So you can probably do
++
++ (apply #'excl::.inv-s-aref newvalue array subscript-list)
++
++ This will work until we get Franz to make (setf (apply #'aref ...
++ work.
You are correct, this is the proper workaround in the absence of the
patch.
Kevin Layer
Franz Inc.