Subject: Re: Why there is no standard FIXNUMP?
From: (Rob Warnock)
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2008 03:32:05 -0600
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Message-ID: <>
Kent M Pitman  <> wrote:
| Barry Margolin <> writes:
| > And while FIXNUM is defined in terms of the range [most-negative-fixnum, 
| > most-positive-fixnum], the only reason this type even exists is because 
| > it's supposed to be the type that can be represented most efficiently.
| That's the motivation.  But, textually/specificationally, there's no
| manifest requirement I can think of ... though you're naturally
| welcome to show I'm just spacing out and forgetting one.

Well, there's always the basic restiction that "the type FIXNUM
is required to be a supertype of (SIGNED-BYTE 16)", as well as
the interactions between MOST-POSITIVE-FIXNUM and the various
ARRAY-TOTAL-SIZE-LIMIT, etc. -- that we discussed here not all
that long ago.


Rob Warnock			<>
627 26th Avenue			<URL:>
San Mateo, CA 94403		(650)572-2607