Re: [Chicken-users] Runtime arity?

[Graham Fawcett]

On Jan 29, 2008 12:25 PM, Kon Lovett <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Jan 29, 2008, at 9:18 AM, John Cowan wrote:
> > Graham Fawcett scripsit:
> >
> >> It's of less use when the procedure takes variable arguments, though,
> > Sometimes you get a useful result:
> >
> >       (procedure-information list) => (list . lst120)
> > And sometimes you don't:
> >       (procedure-information +) => C_plus
>
> Yeah, it seems we need a database of the built-in's "procedure-
> information". Oh well, one more todo.

Hm, is it just primitive C functions that need better "procedure
information"? It might be easier to fix that, than to build and
maintain a database.

G