[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: typechecking
From: |
Dale P. Smith |
Subject: |
Re: typechecking |
Date: |
Mon, 10 May 2004 17:47:41 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) |
Marius Vollmer <address@hidden> writes:
> Han-Wen Nienhuys <address@hidden> writes:
>> I propose that the old
>>
>> DEBUG_TYPING_STRICTNESS==2
>>
>> is removed, as it provides little extra strictness.
>
> Hmm, I don't agree. That setting is much stricter than the default
> one: Guile itself has many places that would need to be fixed for
> STRICTNESS == 2. For example, code like
>
> SCM x;
>
> if (x == SCM_EOL)
> ...
>
> does not compile with STRICTNESS == 2, and it is indeed not completely
> correct. (It should be SCM_EQ_P (x, SCM_EOL) or SCM_NULLP (x).)
>
> It would be a nice little (?) project to make Guile compile with
> STRICTNESS == 2. Some places, like
>
> switch (ISYMNUM (SCM_CAR (x)))
> {
> case (ISYMNUM (SCM_IM_AND)):
>
> in eval.c might be hard to fix, tho.
I thought that STRICTNESS == 2 was for extreme type checking, but for
suboptimal code, and that Guile code should always be able to be
compiled at level 2.
-Dale
--
Dale P. Smith
dsmith at actron dot com
- Re: typechecking, Marius Vollmer, 2004/05/10
- Re: typechecking,
Dale P. Smith <=
- Re: typechecking, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2004/05/10
- Re: typechecking, Dirk Herrmann, 2004/05/15
- Re: typechecking, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2004/05/26
- Re: typechecking, Dirk Herrmann, 2004/05/30
- Re: typechecking, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2004/05/30
- Re: typechecking, Dirk Herrmann, 2004/05/31
- Re: typechecking, Andy Wingo, 2004/05/30