-;;;; Copyright (C) 1999, 2001, 2006 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+;;;; Copyright (C) 1999, 2001, 2006, 2009 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
;;;;
;;;; This library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
;;;; modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public
;;;; License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either
-;;;; version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
+;;;; version 3 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
;;;;
;;;; This library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
;;;; but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
;; There are circularities here; you can't import (oop goops compile)
;; before (oop goops). So when compiling, make sure that things are
;; kosher.
-(eval-when (compile) (resolve-module '(oop goops)))
+(eval-when (expand) (resolve-module '(oop goops)))
(define-module (oop goops compile)
:use-module (oop goops)
:use-module (oop goops util)
- :export (compute-cmethod compile-make-procedure)
+ :export (compute-cmethod)
:no-backtrace
)
-;;;
-;;; Method entries
-;;;
-
-(define code-table-lookup
- (letrec ((check-entry (lambda (entry types)
- (if (null? types)
- (and (not (struct? (car entry)))
- entry)
- (and (eq? (car entry) (car types))
- (check-entry (cdr entry) (cdr types)))))))
- (lambda (code-table types)
- (cond ((null? code-table) #f)
- ((check-entry (car code-table) types))
- (else (code-table-lookup (cdr code-table) types))))))
-
-(define (compute-cmethod methods types)
- (or (code-table-lookup (slot-ref (car methods) 'code-table) types)
- (let* ((method (car methods))
- (cmethod (compile-method methods types))
- (entry (append types cmethod)))
- (slot-set! method 'code-table
- (cons entry (slot-ref method 'code-table)))
- cmethod)))
-
;;;
;;; Compiling next methods into method bodies
;;;
;;; So, for the reader: there basic idea is that, given that the
;;; semantics of `next-method' depend on the concrete types being
;;; dispatched, why not compile a specific procedure to handle each type
-;;; combination that we see at runtime. There are two compilation
-;;; strategies implemented: one for the memoizer, and one for the VM
-;;; compiler.
+;;; combination that we see at runtime.
;;;
;;; In theory we can do much better than a bytecode compilation, because
;;; we know the *exact* types of the arguments. It's ideal for native
;;; I think this whole generic application mess would benefit from a
;;; strict MOP.
-;;; Temporary solution---return #f if x doesn't refer to `next-method'.
-(define (next-method? x)
- (and (pair? x)
- (or (eq? (car x) 'next-method)
- (next-method? (car x))
- (next-method? (cdr x)))))
-
-;; Called by the `method' macro in goops.scm.
-(define (compile-make-procedure formals specializers body)
- (and (next-method? body)
- (let ((next-method-sym (gensym " next-method"))
- (args-sym (gensym)))
- `(lambda (,next-method-sym)
- (lambda ,formals
- (let ((next-method (lambda ,args-sym
- (if (null? ,args-sym)
- ,(if (list? formals)
- `(,next-method-sym ,@formals)
- `(apply
- ,next-method-sym
- ,@(improper->proper formals)))
- (apply ,next-method-sym ,args-sym)))))
- ,@(if (null? body)
- '((begin))
- body)))))))
-
-(define (compile-method methods types)
+(define (compute-cmethod methods types)
(let ((make-procedure (slot-ref (car methods) 'make-procedure)))
(if make-procedure
(make-procedure
- (if (null? methods)
+ (if (null? (cdr methods))
(lambda args
(no-next-method (method-generic-function (car methods)) args))
(compute-cmethod (cdr methods) types)))