Re: Getting rid of compiled closures?

[Dirk Herrmann]

On Tue, 5 Dec 2000, Dirk Herrmann wrote:

> Hello everybody,
> 
> as for now, the only use of compiled closures _within_guile_ is for gprocs
> that have a signature that does not fit into a small standard subset of
> signatures.  All other uses of scm_cclo, like eval closures and guardians
> not use applicable smobs for their implementation.
  ^now
> However, for these gprocs it is not actually necessary to use a compiled
> closure.  All information that is needed for their representation would
> fit into a double cell.  The compiled closure implementation comes from
> the time before there was the double cell possibility.  Now, they could
> either be implemented using an applicable smob, or a tc7 code of their
> own.
> 
> If that was done, the concept of compiled closures could be removed from
> guile.  Should this be done, and, if so, which implementation for gprocs
> should be taken:  as a scm_tc7_subr_x code, or as an applicable smob?

Some typos are worse than others...

Best regards
Dirk