On 03/02/2016 10:30 AM, Philipp Stephani wrote:
> 
> 
> Daniel Colascione <dancol@dancol.org <mailto:dancol@dancol.org>> schrieb
> am Di., 1. März 2016 um 00:15 Uhr:
> 
>     On 02/29/2016 03:03 PM, Philipp Stephani wrote:
>     > Is it a strict requirement that emacs_value be a pointer? If not,
>     > couldn't we simply define it as int64 and assume that that will be
>     large
>     > enough to hold a Lisp_Object for the foreseeable future? Or do we
>     expect
>     > Lisp_Object to ever grow beyond 64 bits?
> 
>     I don't like giving users raw Lisp_Objects. 
> 
> 
> But we are already doing that in most cases (64-bit pointers and
> Lisp_Objects): the pointer is not a real pointer, just a Lisp_Object
> cast to a pointer type.

I know, and I don't like it. I wish it were a real pointer.