From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 125626 invoked by alias); 22 Sep 2017 22:26:33 -0000 Mailing-List: contact kawa-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: kawa-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 125612 invoked by uid 89); 22 Sep 2017 22:26:32 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=Hope X-HELO: aibo.runbox.com Received: from aibo.runbox.com (HELO aibo.runbox.com) (91.220.196.211) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 22:26:31 +0000 Received: from [10.9.9.210] (helo=mailfront10.runbox.com) by mailtransmit03.runbox with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dvWOy-0004rD-9i for kawa@sourceware.org; Sat, 23 Sep 2017 00:26:28 +0200 Received: from 70-36-239-144.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com ([70.36.239.144] helo=localhost.localdomain) by mailfront10.runbox.com with esmtpsa (uid:757155 ) (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) id 1dvWOg-0007bF-SC for kawa@sourceware.org; Sat, 23 Sep 2017 00:26:11 +0200 Subject: Re: no class-of ? To: kawa@sourceware.org References: <425B3BC8-31F3-4299-ADB1-9E064C1E8D3E@theptrgroup.com> <51a642b1-f20d-9f32-645d-ea96b935e3c2@bothner.com> From: Per Bothner Message-ID: <332863a5-3fdf-147e-e9c8-23253b0eff31@bothner.com> Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 22:26:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-q3/txt/msg00078.txt.bz2 On 09/22/2017 03:18 PM, Jamison Hope wrote: > OK, so if I understand correctly, I can't use a macro for this, but what > I can do instead is write a function that always gets inlined. The > function itself doesn't really have to do anything, because the real > work will be done in the validate-apply handler that rewrites the > procedure application to a new Expression. And there, I can decide what > kind of Expression to construct based upon the Type of the argument > expression. 100% correct. -- --Per Bothner per@bothner.com http://per.bothner.com/