Re: [Chicken-users] c-string return question

[Jörg F . Wittenberger]

On Oct 13 2011, John Cowan wrote:

> Alan Post scripsit:
>
> > It does make the routine non-reentrant.  Does that matter here?
>
> I don't see how.  This routine is called from Chicken, and the string
> gets copied into a Chicken string right away.
>
> I suppose you might want to shut off interrupts.

Common.  When I consider such low level things, then I'm
not caught in the cage of the application at hand.

It might very well be that I want one day to run two chicken
threads in one process.  So far there is no promise that this might
work.  But the declarations in chicken core look already as if one
could try to do that.

I don't want to accidentally create a stupid test case for the fact
that there is no provision (I can't even imagine any) for code
inside foreign-lambda* to be always thread local...

I'd rather keep a test case for the temporary dysfunctional but
good API for returning on stack strings.

If it was not for QA wrt. chicken, my simplest solution would be
to just use the equivalent definition as it went into chicken.
But, that's *not* the point, you see.