Re: bignum branch

[Andy Moreton]

On Sat 04 Aug 2018, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

>> From: Andy Moreton <address@hidden>
>> Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2018 20:16:05 +0100
>> 
>> Yes. Also perhaps change XBIGNUM to:
>> 
>>     INLINE struct Lisp_Bignum *
>>     XBIGNUM (Lisp_Object a)
>>     {
>>       eassert (BIGNUMP (a));
>>       return XUNTAG (a, Lisp_Misc, struct Lisp_Bignum)->value;
>>     }
>> 
>> That allows "XBIGNUM(value)->value" to be replaced with "XBIGNUM(value)"
>> in all callers.
>
> That would go against the convention with all the other Xfoo macros.

True, the only thing with similar behaviour being xmint_pointer. While
inconsistent with the other Xfoo macros, it does reduce visual clutter
in the callers.

> However, I see your point, and so perhaps an additional macro,
> XINTEGER, could call either XINT or XBIGNUM()->value, depending on the
> argument type?

I'm not sure that would help, as callers still need to know if the
result is a bignum or fixnum to handle it correctly.

    AndyM