From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: dsmith@actron.com (Dale P. Smith) Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: typechecking Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 17:47:41 -0400 Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <87k6zkj6o2.fsf@actron.com> References: <16486.52591.672130.224861@localhost.localdomain> <87brkwc6f7.fsf@zagadka.ping.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1084226319 20995 80.91.224.253 (10 May 2004 21:58:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 21:58:39 +0000 (UTC) Cc: hanwen@xs4all.nl, guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon May 10 23:58:28 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 1BNIn5-0005v4-00 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 23:58:27 +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 1BNIlq-0001wG-5D for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 17:57:10 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.34) id 1BNIed-0006mt-Rf for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 17:49:43 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.34) id 1BNId6-0006EW-Bk for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 17:48:44 -0400 Original-Received: from [207.170.141.98] (helo=mail.actron.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.34) id 1BNId1-0006Dv-F8 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 17:48:03 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost ([192.168.0.216]) by mail.actron.com (8.12.5/8.9.3) with ESMTP id i4AMPM6F011970; Mon, 10 May 2004 18:25:22 -0400 Original-Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 1000) id CC691DF927; Mon, 10 May 2004 17:47:41 -0400 (EDT) Original-To: Marius Vollmer In-Reply-To: <87brkwc6f7.fsf@zagadka.ping.de> (Marius Vollmer's message of "Mon, 10 May 2004 23:34:52 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) 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:3697 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:3697 Marius Vollmer writes: > Han-Wen Nienhuys writes: >> 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. I thought that STRICTNESS == 2 was for extreme type checking, but for suboptimal code, and that Guile code should always be able to be compiled at level 2. -Dale -- Dale P. Smith dsmith at actron dot com _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel