[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: More functions accepting strings and symbols
From: |
thi |
Subject: |
Re: More functions accepting strings and symbols |
Date: |
Wed, 11 Oct 2000 12:47:52 -0700 |
From: Dirk Herrmann <address@hidden>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 19:29:29 +0200 (MEST)
Up to now this has not been a big deal, since strings and symbols were
represented similarly. However, as I am currently trying to make accesses
to different types more explicit in the code (by for example splitting
SCM_LENGTH into SCM_STRING_LENGTH, SCM_SYMBOL_LENGTH and so on), it
becomes obvious that there are some functions which are not very explicit
about their inputs. I suggest to restrict the accepted input parameter
types to strings in most of the cases.
nooooooo!!!! [sounds of hair ripping out]
i can't describe how unhappy i would be if string/symbol
interoperability were dropped. :-(
thi