genworks

Good point. The define-object-amendment mechanism needs to be hooked into slime-edit-definition. As it is currently the define-object-amendment does a rather brute-force redefinition of the class object.

Open for submissions: $200~~-300~~. Requires full regression tests in the style of the tests in gendl/regression/source/ and e.g. gendl/regression/geom-base/source/angle-between-vectors.lisp. ~~define-object-amendment also needs to be audited to make sure it is...

Merging #167 into here: Macro `define-object-amendment` does not check for override of reserved words. Hence, a user can naively break gendl completely by doing something like. ``` lisp (define-object foo...

> I have made a fix for this assuming you wanted to maintain the brute-force redefinition approach. > Is this presumption okay? Or do you fundamentally want to change the...

Actually for this item I'm not sure how the regression-test-data approach would work. This one might need a manual test procedure. Actually two items here - the M-. and the...

~~Open for submissions: $100~~ This item should cover as many common cases of malformed define-object content as possible.

Removed bounty, this is too open-ended. Will be adding more bounties for other issues.

Open for submission: $50

These were put there for a reason - they are the minimal placeholders in vanilla-mixin to avoid crashing of tasty if you try to include a non-geometric object in the...

Agreed this needs to be fixed. It will require a bit of additional data structures around the inspector since the inspector is currently a single object which keeps getting bashed...