From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Neil Jerram Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] %nil-handling optimization and fixes v1 Date: Tue, 01 Sep 2009 23:09:43 +0100 Message-ID: <87iqg2nwpk.fsf@arudy.ossau.uklinux.net> References: <20090709161043.GA2538@fibril.netris.org> <20090830180143.GA2484@fibril.netris.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1251843284 13578 80.91.229.12 (1 Sep 2009 22:14:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2009 22:14:44 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Andy Wingo , guile-devel@gnu.org To: Mark H Weaver Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Sep 02 00:14:37 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 1Mibcb-0003KN-96 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 02 Sep 2009 00:14:37 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56178 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Mibca-0001Nn-JX for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Sep 2009 18:14:36 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MibXy-0005T4-T5 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Sep 2009 18:09:50 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MibXu-0005O7-6W for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Sep 2009 18:09:50 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=36436 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MibXt-0005O0-Tg for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Sep 2009 18:09:45 -0400 Original-Received: from mail3.uklinux.net ([80.84.72.33]:36457) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MibXs-0002xk-Rg for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Sep 2009 18:09:45 -0400 Original-Received: from arudy (host86-152-99-133.range86-152.btcentralplus.com [86.152.99.133]) by mail3.uklinux.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 178A01F661F; Tue, 1 Sep 2009 23:09:44 +0100 (BST) Original-Received: from arudy.ossau.uklinux.net (arudy [127.0.0.1]) by arudy (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E20438021; Tue, 1 Sep 2009 23:09:43 +0100 (BST) In-Reply-To: <20090830180143.GA2484@fibril.netris.org> (Mark H. Weaver's message of "Sun\, 30 Aug 2009 14\:01\:44 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4-2.6 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:9243 Archived-At: Mark H Weaver writes: > I agree that the names are uncomfortably long. We could shorten them > without much loss of clarity by replacing "lisp_nil" with "nil" and > "and_not" with "not", yielding: > > scm_is_false_assume_not_nil scm_is_true_assume_not_nil > scm_is_false_not_nil scm_is_true_or_nil > scm_is_false_or_nil scm_is_true_not_nil > > scm_is_lisp_false scm_is_lisp_true > > scm_is_null_assume_not_nil > scm_is_null_not_nil > scm_is_null_or_nil > > scm_is_bool_not_nil > scm_is_bool_or_nil > > I can still do this if y'all would prefer the shorter names. FWIW, dropping "lisp_" looks OK, but I'm not sure about dropping "and_". "scm_is_false_not_nil" feels notably harder to understand than "scm_is_false_and_not_nil". > Are there any remaining objections to mapping scm_is_false/true/null > as follows? > > scm_is_null --> scm_is_null_or_lisp_nil > scm_is_false --> scm_is_false_or_lisp_nil > scm_is_true --> scm_is_true_and_not_lisp_nil (Not from me - but I assume you're checking with others...) Neil