Re: Intel icc finds too many errors in guile 1.8.8 to compile

[Neil Jerram]

address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:

> I agree.  Adding a named constant for 0 is one way to help the compiler
> spot such mistakes.

[...]

> So these could become, say:
>
>   enum scm_dynwind_flags
>   {
>     SCM_F_DYNWIND_NOT_REWINDABLE = 0,
>     SCM_F_DYNWIND_NOT_REWINDABLE
>   };
>
>   typedef enum scm_dynwind_flags scm_t_dynwind_flags;
>
>   enum scm_wind_flags
>   {
>     SCM_F_WIND_NON_LOCAL_EXIT = 0,
>     SCM_F_WIND_EXPLICITLY
>   };
>
>   typedef enum scm_wind_flags scm_t_wind_flags;

But wouldn't this approach break as soon as we added another flag, in
the way that I described in my previous email?

If the answer to that is yes, I think the reality is that bit flag
combinations can't be made type-safe in C, and therefore we should stick
with #defines.

Regards,
        Neil