From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: The relationship between SCM and scm_t_bits. Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 10:58:51 -0400 Organization: What did you have in mind? A short, blunt, human pyramid? Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1083771269 18607 80.91.224.253 (5 May 2004 15:34:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 5 May 2004 15:34:29 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed May 05 17:34:00 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 1BLOPH-0000v0-00 for ; Wed, 05 May 2004 17:33:59 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1BLOK8-0003a7-Jm for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 11:28:40 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.30) id 1BLO5E-0008EN-TM for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 11:13:16 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.30) id 1BLNrk-0004wg-2H for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 10:59:51 -0400 Original-Received: from [129.22.104.46] (helo=mirapoint1.tis.cwru.edu) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.30) id 1BLNrj-0004wX-Hl for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 05 May 2004 10:59:19 -0400 Original-Received: from multivac.cwru.edu (multivac.ITS.CWRU.Edu [129.22.114.26]) by mirapoint1.tis.cwru.edu (MOS 3.4.3-CR) with SMTP id BKB68157; Wed, 5 May 2004 10:58:52 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: (qmail 24289 invoked by uid 500); 5 May 2004 14:59:14 -0000 Original-To: Marius Vollmer In-Reply-To: (Marius Vollmer's message of "Wed, 05 May 2004 12:00:34 +0200") Mail-Copies-To: nobody Mail-Followup-To: Marius Vollmer , guile-devel@gnu.org Original-Lines: 27 User-Agent: Gnus/5.110002 (No Gnus v0.2) 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:3674 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:3674 Marius Vollmer 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