Re: SCM_CALL_N

[Keisuke Nishida]

At 24 Jun 2001 11:45:28 +0100,
Neil Jerram wrote:
> 
> Yes, on reflection, I now agree with you.  Perhaps SCM_APPLY_N would
> also be useful, where SCM_APPLY_N is defined to take N arguments and a
> final list argument:
> 
>         SCM_APPLY_N (proc, arg1, ..., argN, args)
>         ->
>         (apply proc arg1 ... argN args)
> 
> Then SCM_CALL_N and SCM_APPLY_N would completely encapsulate the
> optimization use of scm_listofnull, I think.

Agreed.  If nobody objects, I'll write a patch and apply it tomorrow.

Keisuke