|
|
> From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: cyd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, 3888@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 14:32:49 -0400
>
> A defvar can trivially be moved from Lisp to C. I don't see any
> obstacle here. As for functions, it's even easier since you can rename
> one of the two from `foo' to `foo-internal' or somesuch and move some
> code from one to the other. We've already done such things for lote and
> lots of functions. There's no technical problem here.
No technical problems, but experience teaches me that these solutions
don't hold in practice, i.e. new non-internal functions that overload
others pop up with time.
Also, the `foo-internal' trick does not solve the problem of the doc
string that needs to say something platform-specific without bothering
too much the users of other platforms.
Finally, there's (an admittedly very specific and quite rare) problem
of ls-lisp and its ilk that overload the default implementation with
something utterly different, and whose doc string _must_ be very
different if we want it to be useful.
I tried to think of an infrastructure that would solve all these
use-cases in a relatively elegant way that would not become a
maintenance burden.
|
|