Phoebe Goldman
Phoebe Goldman
Commit message pasted here so you don't have to dig: - `file:char-input` and `file:char-output` become `file:get-char-input!` and `file:get-char-output!`, for enhanced clarity that there's only one `Input` associated with a given...
@malisper are you still interested in this PR?
I'm interested in this, and it seems like it would be a fun way to dip my toes into the compiler (until now I've focused on the standard library). Before...
I think the only way to do this for subclasses of `structure-object` is to define individual methods, though probably via a macro. But neither the CL spec nor the MOP...
Oh, sure. Sorry, I've been busy and forgot about this.
> Ideally it would be possible to pattern match on anything that implements Num. `Num` and `Eq`, I would think.
I am not aware of anyone having done a vulnerability report on Hunchentoot. I'm not even sure what a vulnerability report means in this context, honestly.
Ah, sorry I forgot about this for so long!
`(push collection object)` is, IMO, a more useful order for currying. `(vec:push! my-vec)` should be `:elt -> Unit` push into `my-vec`, so you can use it on things like `iter:for-each!`.
Does the backend bind with SCCs as if by `letrec` (or, well, non-`progn` recursive `let`, I guess, since we don't distinguish syntactically)? I could be misremembering, but I think that...