From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Mark H Weaver Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.bugs Subject: bug#17474: Ping? Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 18:00:47 -0400 Message-ID: <87vbq0qa28.fsf@yeeloong.lan> References: <87r43zuswp.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87bnru81ke.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <874mxkrwff.fsf@yeeloong.lan> <87vbq05bw8.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1407708145 15475 80.91.229.3 (10 Aug 2014 22:02:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 22:02:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 17474@debbugs.gnu.org To: David Kastrup Original-X-From: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Aug 11 00:02:17 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-bugs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XGbBx-0004ug-N7 for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 00:02:17 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:32853 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XGbBx-0007tO-Bv for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 10 Aug 2014 18:02:17 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39964) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XGbBo-0007sP-78 for bug-guile@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Aug 2014 18:02:14 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XGbBi-0000Yr-At for bug-guile@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Aug 2014 18:02:08 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:59366) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XGbBi-0000Ym-8P for bug-guile@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Aug 2014 18:02:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XGbBh-0008GR-J4 for bug-guile@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Aug 2014 18:02:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Mark H Weaver Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guile@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 22:02:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 17474 X-GNU-PR-Package: guile X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 17474-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B17474.140770811131750 (code B ref 17474); Sun, 10 Aug 2014 22:02:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 17474) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Aug 2014 22:01:51 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38076 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XGbBW-0008G2-Od for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 10 Aug 2014 18:01:51 -0400 Original-Received: from world.peace.net ([96.39.62.75]:40768 ident=hope8) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XGbBU-0008Fs-3I for 17474@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 10 Aug 2014 18:01:48 -0400 Original-Received: from c-24-62-95-23.hsd1.ma.comcast.net ([24.62.95.23] helo=yeeloong.lan) by world.peace.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1XGbBI-0001LX-Dm; Sun, 10 Aug 2014 18:01:36 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87vbq05bw8.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> (David Kastrup's message of "Sun, 10 Aug 2014 22:26:47 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-guile@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GUILE, GNU's Ubiquitous Extension Language" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.bugs:7534 Archived-At: David Kastrup writes: > So you think that it will be more "lightweight" if (values) does not > have an immediate representation but rather creates a multiple-values > object on the heap? I don't have time to continue this discussion, but I wanted to respond to this one point: there should be a single global statically-allocated instance of the multiple-values object containing zero values, and the procedures that create multiple-values objects would always use that one. Mark