Is there any way to see what a closure looks like in OpenMCL? I'm
guessing not, since it's already compiled, but GCL (which does not
compile functions automatically) has a nice way of printing closures, so
maybe there's a way.
Even if there was just a way to effectively trace the macro lambda
that'd be helpful.
Thanks,
David
From: Edi Weitz
Subject: Re: Openmcl: Looking inside a closure
Date:
Message-ID: <u7jgserq6.fsf@agharta.de>
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 13:39:15 -0500, "David L. Rager" <·······@no-spam-pleez.cs.utexas.edu> wrote:
> Is there any way to see what a closure looks like in OpenMCL? I'm
> guessing not, since it's already compiled, but GCL (which does not
> compile functions automatically) has a nice way of printing
> closures, so maybe there's a way.
I don't use OpenMCL but there's FUNCTION-LAMBDA-EXPRESSION in the ANSI
standard:
<http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Body/f_fn_lam.htm>
But as you said - once the function is compiled the information you
get from this function is most likely not very helpful.
Cheers,
Edi.
--
Lisp is not dead, it just smells funny.
Real email: (replace (subseq ·········@agharta.de" 5) "edi")
So OpenMCL returns straight nil's (since compiled already). Maybe
there's a way to disable compilation?
GCL returns nils too, but when it pretty prints the closure, it gives
you the expression anyway (which is great, but I can't use GCL since
it's not parallelizable yet).
Allegro actually implements this by the spec, but I haven't written the
allegro implementation of parallel-let yet, so maybe that will be my
next step.
Thx.
Edi Weitz wrote:
> I don't use OpenMCL but there's FUNCTION-LAMBDA-EXPRESSION in the ANSI
> standard:
>
> <http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Body/f_fn_lam.htm>
>
> But as you said - once the function is compiled the information you
> get from this function is most likely not very helpful.
>
> Cheers,
> Edi.
>
David L. Rager wrote:
> Allegro actually implements this by the spec, but I haven't written the
> allegro implementation of parallel-let yet, so maybe that will be my
> next step.
What is this "parallel-let" that you are talking about?
Pascal
--
2nd European Lisp and Scheme Workshop
July 26 - Glasgow, Scotland - co-located with ECOOP 2005
http://lisp-ecoop05.bknr.net/
In the short: it evaluates the bindings to a let in parallel. It's not
too complex, in that it only parallelizes at the root function call
right now. I'll probably post the code in a while in hopes of getting
some constructive criticism, but I'd like to work out the bugs I can
find first :).
Pascal Costanza wrote:
> What is this "parallel-let" that you are talking about?