From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Han-Wen Nienhuys Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: typechecking Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 00:57:35 +0200 Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <16544.2271.454230.492574@localhost.localdomain> References: <16486.52591.672130.224861@localhost.localdomain> <87brkwc6f7.fsf@zagadka.ping.de> Reply-To: hanwen@xs4all.nl NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1084229789 28737 80.91.224.253 (10 May 2004 22:56:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 22:56:29 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue May 11 00:56:14 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BNJh0-0001kD-00 for ; Tue, 11 May 2004 00:56:14 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1BNJg9-0001Bb-29 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 18:55:21 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.34) id 1BNJg3-0001AT-UR for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 18:55:16 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.34) id 1BNJfX-0000xG-9F for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 18:55:15 -0400 Original-Received: from [213.84.26.127] (helo=localhost.localdomain) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.34) id 1BNJfW-0000wZ-Pd for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 18:54:43 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost.localdomain.byrd.xs4all.nl (byrd [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.localdomain (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i4AMvZlK012607; Tue, 11 May 2004 00:57:35 +0200 Original-To: Marius Vollmer In-Reply-To: <87brkwc6f7.fsf@zagadka.ping.de> X-Mailer: VM 7.14 under Emacs 21.3.1 X-yoursite-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-yoursite-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: hanwen@xs4all.nl X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:3700 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:3700 mvo@zagadka.de writes: > > in eval.c might be hard to fix, tho. > > > Also, I think that DEBUG_TYPING_STRICTNESS==0 should go too. The code > > contained a thinko (leading to loads of compile errors). This > > suggests that the code has never been tested since its inception a few > > years ago. > > Can you elaborate? Guile itself compiles fine with STRICTNESS==0. > Indeed, this strictness level offers no type checking. 1.6.4 has # define SCM_PACK(x) ((scm_t_bits) (x)) I believe this should be #define SCM_PACK(x) ((SCM) (x)) if anything. > When I say "type checking" what really mean is that the compiler > checks whether the user only uses SCM values in the way we want it to, > like, no direct arithmetic, no direct use in conditional tests, only What's the rationale for not allowing direct use in conditional tests? -- Han-Wen Nienhuys | hanwen@xs4all.nl | http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel