From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?=) Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: more compilation failures: -DSCM_DEBUG_TYPING_STRICTNESS=2 Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2009 10:08:05 +0200 Message-ID: <877hwheplm.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87bplu4fbr.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1251878938 29382 80.91.229.12 (2 Sep 2009 08:08:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2009 08:08:58 +0000 (UTC) To: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Sep 02 10:08:51 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MiktZ-0008UZ-Ti for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 02 Sep 2009 10:08:46 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43887 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MiktY-0007Or-TP for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 02 Sep 2009 04:08:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MiktR-0007Om-EM for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Sep 2009 04:08:37 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MiktM-0007Mo-SM for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Sep 2009 04:08:37 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=38655 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MiktM-0007Mi-Gr for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Sep 2009 04:08:32 -0400 Original-Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]:12761) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MiktL-0000bE-Vb for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Sep 2009 04:08:32 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MiktL-0005wx-CV for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Sep 2009 04:08:31 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1MiktJ-0008QO-MI for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Sep 2009 10:08:29 +0200 Original-Received: from laptop-147-210-128-170.labri.fr ([147.210.128.170]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 02 Sep 2009 10:08:29 +0200 Original-Received: from ludo by laptop-147-210-128-170.labri.fr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 02 Sep 2009 10:08:29 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 28 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: laptop-147-210-128-170.labri.fr X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 16 Fructidor an 217 de la =?iso-8859-1?Q?R=E9volutio?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?n?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0xEA52ECF4 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 821D 815D 902A 7EAB 5CEE D120 7FBA 3D4F EB1F 5364 X-OS: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:1tyeo6E3uFoP2HjdpDnbpcK1xG8= X-Detected-Operating-System: by mx20.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:9249 Archived-At: Hi! Ken Raeburn writes: > In the Guile case, I'm a tiny bit concerned about some of the pointer/ > int games played (e.g., I'm pretty sure C99 does not guarantee that > you can convert an arbitrary uintptr_t value to pointer and back and > be guaranteed of getting the original value... but I don't know of a > platform that actually violates that assumption), but only a tiny bit. Really? I think the whole purpose of `uintptr_t' is to allow that, isn't it? >> Anyway, in the meantime, we can conditionalize static initialization >> stuff from bdw-gc-static-alloc on STRICTNESS == 0 and keep everyone >> happy. >> >> Does that sound reasonable? > > Sure. Actually, STRICTNESS=1 is the default -- 0 makes SCM an > integer, 1 makes it a pointer to a struct, which adds a little more > type safety, and 2 makes it a union, which breaks casting, > initialization, etc. Oh, right. Thanks, Ludo'.