From: prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc)
Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: The relationship between SCM and scm_t_bits.
Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 10:58:51 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m3fzaely2m.fsf@multivac.cwru.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ljk6zrfb25.fsf@troy.dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de> (Marius Vollmer's message of "Wed, 05 May 2004 12:00:34 +0200")
Marius Vollmer <marius.vollmer@uni-dortmund.de> wrote:
> I haven't looked myself but I think that STRICTNESS == 2 wont put
> SCM values into registers or something.
Ah, ok. Well, that depends on the compiler - maybe more recent
compilers are better with this. (Though we still have to think about
older ones too for a while.) The definition of SCM for STRICTNESS ==
2 also has the advantage that an SCM object can be accessed through an
scm_t_bits* pointer.
> Isn't there the added advantage with level 2 that it doesn't accept
> SCM values in conditions?
Oops, right. I had only been thinking of getting a diagnostic when
using one type where the other specifically was expected -
assignments, function arguments, etc.
> Yes, to all. We need it to store arbitrary pointers for smobs. When
> you define a new smob type, you get to decide what to do with the
> words of the smob cell: you can use them for SCMs, or for anything
> else that fits into a SCM.
Hmm. A union including void* would be perfect, if not for the
register problem.
paul
_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-05-05 14:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-05-03 15:06 The relationship between SCM and scm_t_bits Marius Vollmer
2004-05-03 16:10 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-05-03 16:21 ` Paul Jarc
2004-05-04 13:53 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-05-04 17:16 ` Paul Jarc
2004-05-04 17:49 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-05-04 18:35 ` Paul Jarc
2004-05-05 10:00 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-05-05 14:58 ` Paul Jarc [this message]
2004-05-10 13:42 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-05-15 7:31 ` Dirk Herrmann
2004-05-17 18:09 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-05-15 15:00 ` Dirk Herrmann
2004-05-15 16:42 ` Dirk Herrmann
2004-05-17 19:22 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-05-17 20:17 ` Paul Jarc
2004-05-21 19:37 ` Dirk Herrmann
2004-05-21 20:30 ` Paul Jarc
2004-05-22 6:48 ` Dirk Herrmann
2004-05-23 15:03 ` Paul Jarc
2004-08-09 21:09 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-08-20 19:17 ` Dirk Herrmann
2004-08-21 16:16 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-10-03 9:09 ` Dirk Herrmann
2004-10-04 14:12 ` Marius Vollmer
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=m3fzaely2m.fsf@multivac.cwru.edu \
--to=prj@po.cwru.edu \
--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).