[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: The relationship between SCM and scm_t_bits.
From: |
Marius Vollmer |
Subject: |
Re: The relationship between SCM and scm_t_bits. |
Date: |
Mon, 03 May 2004 18:10:50 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.1003 (Gnus v5.10.3) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) |
Marius Vollmer <address@hidden> writes:
> [...] SCM_PACK and SCM_UNPACK might one day need to become
> non-trivial on certain platforms (like they were on Crays, I think.)
Ok, I just (re-)discovered that this is a non-issue: these encoding
changes are done by SCM2PTR and PTR2SCM.
Right now, I have a version of Guile that doesn't store scm_t_bits
into the heap, and it does feel a cleaner since no scm_t_bits* <->
SCM* casts are done.
Now, I'll try to completely remove the use of the scm_t_cell type
(only the use, not the definition). This one is rather confusing as
well since it is not used consequently (I think).
Re: The relationship between SCM and scm_t_bits., Marius Vollmer, 2004/05/10
Re: The relationship between SCM and scm_t_bits., Dirk Herrmann, 2004/05/15