Re: type checking for arbitrary lisp objects

[Stefan Monnier]

>> Why not use cl-deftype?
> ...Interesting! - I guess the main difference to what I have in mind
> is that cl-deftype appears to require some lisp code for FORMS.
> I am thinking about replacing these forms by some more readable
> pattern such as the one I included in my first post.  The function
> bbdb-check-type then compares an arbitrary lisp object against such
> pattern.  I find it more readable and also more flexible to define
> patterns instead of hacking actual code.

AFAIK cl-deftype is specifically there to define those patterns, so you
can later pass them to cl-check-type.


        Stefan