Re: [pro] Sensible interpretation of declarations in CLOS

On Mon, 29 Oct 2012, Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll wrote:

I expected that something more sensible could be agreed upon.

The lack of optimization in CLOS has long been a sore point. Here are some related reads. https://groups.google.com/d/topic/comp.lang.lisp/qN6U1f-mE_g/discussion http://common-lisp.net/~loliveira/tmp/sealing-proposal.txt PC seems to argue that sealing is not necessarily helpful for optimization. I tend to agree, but would still argue that a naive compiler might only try inlining things that are sealed. Sealing may also be close to what the Racket community wants. They dislike the "growth by mutation" nature of CLOS, and the uncertainty that comes with it. - Daniel