[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
TYPE-OF
One might want (TYPE-OF 2) => (INTEGER 2 2), or perhaps just (INTEGER 2)
and define (INTEGER x) <=> (integer x x). But this does not seem to
generalize nicely to other data types.
If the goal is that TYPE-OF should return the most specific possible
type, then clearly when applied to object x it should return (MEMBER x),
as that is the most specific type that contains x. But this is not
very useful, and therefore this goal is not what we really want.
--Guy
- Follow-Ups:
- TYPE-OF
- From: Robert W. Kerns <RWK@YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- References:
- TYPE-OF
- From: Daniel L. Weinreb <DLW@ALDERAAN.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>