Re: Is gcc able to handle anonymous functions?

[Marc Hohl]

Am 06.07.2012 09:51, schrieb David Kastrup:
> Joe Neeman <address@hidden> writes:
>
> >      I think it's exercises like that that help strengthen the Scheme
> >      bindings and thus lead to more customizability/extensibility.
> >
> >
> > In this case, I disagree. The function in question is used in 2 places
> > in the C++ code, neither of which is a good candidate for
> > customization. The only argument for porting this function in the
> > first place is that it happened to live in the same file as some other
> > stuff (which _did_ make sense to port). That doesn't sound like a very
> > good argument to me.
> To me it sounds like a Scheme interface to
> Pointer_group_interface::find_grob is needed here.
Oh, ok, that's a completely different viewpoint.
> I think being able to move the _entire_ chunk of functionality to Scheme
> makes _excellent_ sense since it means we arrive at a piece of
> functionality that can serve as a template for _user_ written
> functionality without requiring recompilation.
Patches are highly apprechiated ;-)
... or any hints how to proceed on that issue.

Regards,

Marc