From: Marius Vollmer <mvo@zagadka.de>
Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: typechecking
Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 23:34:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87brkwc6f7.fsf@zagadka.ping.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <16486.52591.672130.224861@localhost.localdomain> (Han-Wen Nienhuys's message of "Sun, 28 Mar 2004 15:04:47 +0200")
Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanwen@xs4all.nl> writes:
> I've added the stricter typechecking code to the SCM_UNPACK macro in
> CVS HEAD. It caught a few glitches in goops.h and backtrace.h , which
> I corrected.
Thanks!
> I propose that the old
>
> DEBUG_TYPING_STRICTNESS==2
>
> is removed, as it provides little extra strictness.
Hmm, I don't agree. That setting is much stricter than the default
one: Guile itself has many places that would need to be fixed for
STRICTNESS == 2. For example, code like
SCM x;
if (x == SCM_EOL)
...
does not compile with STRICTNESS == 2, and it is indeed not completely
correct. (It should be SCM_EQ_P (x, SCM_EOL) or SCM_NULLP (x).)
It would be a nice little (?) project to make Guile compile with
STRICTNESS == 2. Some places, like
switch (ISYMNUM (SCM_CAR (x)))
{
case (ISYMNUM (SCM_IM_AND)):
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.
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
direct assignment.
--
GPG: D5D4E405 - 2F9B BCCC 8527 692A 04E3 331E FAF8 226A D5D4 E405
_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-05-10 21:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-03-28 13:04 typechecking Han-Wen Nienhuys
2004-05-10 21:34 ` Marius Vollmer [this message]
2004-05-10 21:47 ` typechecking Dale P. Smith
2004-06-10 16:16 ` typechecking Marius Vollmer
2004-05-10 22:57 ` typechecking Han-Wen Nienhuys
2004-05-15 9:16 ` typechecking Dirk Herrmann
2004-05-16 15:11 ` typechecking Han-Wen Nienhuys
2004-05-17 18:31 ` typechecking Marius Vollmer
2004-05-26 17:40 ` typechecking Han-Wen Nienhuys
2004-05-30 8:40 ` typechecking Dirk Herrmann
2004-05-30 8:28 ` typechecking Han-Wen Nienhuys
2004-05-31 7:05 ` typechecking Dirk Herrmann
2004-06-10 16:22 ` typechecking Marius Vollmer
2004-05-30 14:00 ` typechecking Andy Wingo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87brkwc6f7.fsf@zagadka.ping.de \
--to=mvo@zagadka.de \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).