implement full minimal semantics of CONSTANTP #523
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This implements the minimal requirement to be compliant with https://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Body/f_consta.htm
My only question is this move
constantpfromboot.lisptocompiler/compiler.lisp.constantpis used before inansi-loop/ansi-loop.lisp, but this does not break bootstrap because it only use it at macroexpansion time (in which case it can use host'sconstantp). Are we ok with this?I think this is fine because
loopis intended to useconstantpin macroexpansion time anyway and it's unlikely someone make some change and suddenly break bootstrap because of this. But if that does happen, it would be very confusing!