[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
question about subtypep
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1986 06:51 EDT
From: Rob MacLachlan <RAM@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Note there are some possible users of SUBTYPEP that would prefer
answers to be based on some hypothetical maximally restrictive type
system. The main example is a compiler which does compile-time type
checking when possible. Although (THE SHORT-FLOAT 1F0) is quite legal
in an implementation in which SHORT-FLOAT and SINGLE-FLOAT are
identical, it would be reasonable for the compiler to give a warning
anyway. Applications that care about this sort of thing will have to
use a variant version of subtypep that is distinct from the real
SUBTYPEP.
They'll have to do more than that. If the user wrote (THE SHORT-FLOAT 1s0)
it would read as exactly the same Lisp object as (THE SHORT-FLOAT 1f0) in an
implementation where SHORT-FLOAT and SINGLE-FLOAT are identical, so I don't
see how the compiler could distinguish these and give a warning for one but
not for the other.
My intpretation
(based on intensive meditation and reading of scripture) is that
SUBTYPEP returns information about the actual subtype relations in
your implementation.
I agree. I think that's the only consistent interpretation.