[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: common-lisp at SU-AI
- Subject: Named lambdas
- From: Masinter at PARC-MAXC
- Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1982 15:22:00 -0000
That the interpreter/compiled code forgets the name of the function you are executing in and/or the debugger has trouble finding it from looking at
the stack seems more like a lack of functionality on the part of the debugger.
Enough information is there to determine it (e.g., looking at the instruction
preceding the return PC to see what function was called) that a kludge like
NAMED-LAMBDA doesn't seem at all a reasonable part of the white pages.
I had imagined, incorrectly, that NAMED-LAMBDA actually had some semantics
associated with it, e.g. it was similar to the Interlisp notion of creating
a frame with a name which was visible to STKPOS, RETFROM, and other stack
primitives. The current common-lisp spec seems to have a big hole in the area
of primitives which would allow one to write an implementation-independent