26 Dec
2009
26 Dec
'09
9:10 p.m.
On Dec 24, 2009, at 1:20 AM, Helmut Eller wrote:
- Terje Norderhaug [2009-12-24 00:00+0100] writes:
Swank should better aid clients like MCLIDE and SLIME in making sense of the definitions from the various lisp implementations. Two potential solutions have been brought up:
- Swank uses a unified representation of dspecs shared between all
lisp implementations. 2) Swank provides clients with lisp implementation specific information to make sense out of different dspecs.
- let Swank choose the representation but provide a backend function
if someone thinks there is some value in dspecs.
The latter is a reasonable direction. We may as well stick to the current dspec representation but add a backend function that can help clients make sense out of the dspecs. That way the functionality can be added without introducing compatibility issues and disruption for SLIME users.
-- Terje Norderhaug terje@in-progress.com