Re: [patch] subordinate SMOBs with GOOPS superclasses

[Clinton Ebadi]

Klaus Schilling <address@hidden> writes:

> From: Clinton Ebadi <address@hidden>
> Subject: Re: [patch] subordinate SMOBs with GOOPS superclasses
> Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 15:38:03 -0500
>> and not abort the entire system. At least in SBCL it takes a lot of
>> abuse before a C library can crash anything.
>
> That's completely illicit, as SBCL 
>  is of no use whatsoever as an embeddable extension library.


I fail to see how SBCL not being embeddeable annuls my
argument. S/SBCL/Clisp/ and the same argument applies; illegal
instructions or segmentation violations that don't smash the stack or
corrupt the heap is recoverable.

-- 
emacsen: "Like... windows are portals man...
emacsen: Dude... let's yank this shit out of the kill ring"