[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-users] handling the undefined value
From: |
Felix |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-users] handling the undefined value |
Date: |
Sat, 27 Nov 2010 16:06:47 +0100 (CET) |
From: Jörg "F. Wittenberger" <address@hidden>
Subject: Re: [Chicken-users] handling the undefined value
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 22:10:46 +0100
>
> Well, if it was a compiler switch, off by default, it should not do
> harm. Would it?
>
Yes, I'll do that. I could also least remove the warning for the
(common) case of a conditional performing a self-tailcall.
How about "-picky" ?
cheers,
felix
- [Chicken-users] NE [[not exactly]]: handling the undefined value, (continued)
- Re: [Chicken-users] handling the undefined value, F. Wittenberger, 2010/11/22
- Re: [Chicken-users] handling the undefined value, Felix, 2010/11/24
- Re: [Chicken-users] handling the undefined value, John Cowan, 2010/11/24
- Re: [Chicken-users] handling the undefined value, F. Wittenberger, 2010/11/25
- Re: [Chicken-users] handling the undefined value, Felix, 2010/11/25
- Re: [Chicken-users] handling the undefined value, F. Wittenberger, 2010/11/25
- Re: [Chicken-users] handling the undefined value, Felix, 2010/11/26
- Re: [Chicken-users] handling the undefined value, F. Wittenberger, 2010/11/26
- Re: [Chicken-users] handling the undefined value,
Felix <=
- Re: [Chicken-users] handling the undefined value, F. Wittenberger, 2010/11/29