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:
1) 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.
3) 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