Re: [Guile-commits] GNU Guile branch, master, updated. 782a82eed13abb64393f7acad92758ae191ce509

[ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)]

Hello,

"Andy Wingo" <wingo@pobox.com> writes:

> +SCM_DEFINE (scm_uniform_array_to_bytevector, "uniform-array->bytevector",
> +            1, 0, 0, (SCM array),
> +	    "Return a newly allocated bytevector whose contents\n"
> +            "will be copied from the uniform array @var{array}.")
> +#define FUNC_NAME s_scm_uniform_array_to_bytevector
> +{
> +  SCM contents, ret;
> +  size_t len;
> +  scm_t_array_handle h;
> +  const void *base;
> +  size_t sz;
> +  
> +  contents = scm_array_contents (array, SCM_BOOL_T);
> +  if (scm_is_false (contents))
> +    scm_wrong_type_arg_msg (FUNC_NAME, 0, array, "uniform contiguous array");
> +
> +  scm_array_get_handle (contents, &h);
> +
> +  base = scm_array_handle_uniform_elements (&h);
> +  len = h.dims->inc * (h.dims->ubnd - h.dims->lbnd + 1);
> +  sz = scm_array_handle_uniform_element_size (&h);
> +
> +  ret = make_bytevector (len * sz);
> +  memcpy (SCM_BYTEVECTOR_CONTENTS (ret), base, len * sz);

Is this memcpy valid in the case of shared arrays?  Looks like we end up
copying more elements than needed, but maybe it's better this way.

> +           uniform-array->bytevector

I would not export it from `(rnrs bytevector)' given that it has nothing
to do with RnRS.

Also, I would make the new C functions private, given that they are not
intended for general use AIUI.

What d'ya think?

Thanks,
Ludo'.