Search
16:17:37
flip214
(defstruct foo (bar) (bar))
16:17:54
flip214
Class not yet defined: NIL
16:32:54
stassats
flip214: i did git-blame
16:36:26
|3b|
stassats: RATIONAL/RATIONALIZE improvements made my code faster, thanks :)
16:42:09
stassats
folding or type derivation?
16:42:57
|3b|
not sure which specifically, probably folding was enough in that case
16:44:11
|3b|
when would it do one but not the other?
16:44:53
stassats
i doubt type derivation is ever going to be helpful, aside from maybe deriving the sign
16:45:32
|3b|
yeah, was wondering when it would fold without knowing the type directly, or wouldn't fold but would still have something to derive
16:46:34
stassats
oh, and inline-expansion-by-name is out
16:48:53
|3b|
cool, will try that soon too
18:14:10
flip214
stassats: I know, but back then it did work fine... I had that in my own code (that's how I found it!), and I tested afterwards
18:17:55
stassats
it worked fine because you didn't test it without :include
18:19:50
flip214
I'm 99.2% sure I _did_ test _that_ patch before submitting! I remember that I had 30 minutes uninterrupted hacking then ;)
18:20:24
stassats
0.8% is enough for it to not work
18:20:25
flip214
and I changed that because I was confused about the duplicated slot that I couldn't find at first - because it was :included
18:21:13
flip214
I couldn't quickly find an example where the error _message_ gets tested, so I didn't write an explicit test for it
18:22:55
stassats
1.5.3.85-1265644a1 (defstruct foo bar bar) => Class not yet defined: NI
18:28:11
flip214
did you change the past? I _know_ that I tested with and without :include
18:28:43
stassats
you can't talk your way out of it
18:30:45
flip214
I'm already on it, no worries
18:30:56
flip214
but I can't understand it
18:34:09
stassats
well, you either submitted the wrong thing or your memory is faulty