Subject: Re: Accessibility of symbols From: Erik Naggum <email@example.com> Date: 12 Oct 2002 01:10:05 +0000 Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> * Matthew Danish | Given that the current package is "FOO" and accessibility is defined to | mean "does not need a package prefix to reference it", it seems to me | that COMMON-LISP:ATOM is not accessible in package "FOO" and should not | be returned by the above LOOP. I see absolutely nothing wrong with your reasoning here. I am somewhat unhappy that the following code behaves correctly in Allegro CL 6.2: (do-symbols (symbol) (when (string-equal symbol "ATOM") (print symbol))) because it does an explicit test for membership in the shadowed-symbols list in a package (see the expansion of the macro). The `loop´ form uses `with-package-iterator´, so the following form also exhibits the problem: (with-package-iterator (get-symbol :foo :inherited) (loop (multiple-value-bind (flag symbol access package) (get-symbol) (when (string-equal symbol "atom") (print (list symbol access package))) (unless flag (return))))) Allegro CL 6.2 violates the standard when it does not obey the requirement that `:inherited´ returns symbols that are shadowed. The requirement is that the symbols returned are specifically: The symbols that are exported by used packages and that are not shadowed. So Allegro CL and LispWorks contain a pretty serious bug in that they do not exclude shadowed symbols the way `do-symbols´ does. It is pretty sad that the two forms use such radically different underlying mechanisms. -- Erik Naggum, Oslo, Norway Act from reason, and failure makes you rethink and study harder. Act from faith, and failure makes you blame someone and push harder.