guile-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Shouldn't we be developing with TYPING_STRICTNESS=2?


From: Bill Gribble
Subject: Re: Shouldn't we be developing with TYPING_STRICTNESS=2?
Date: 13 Sep 2001 16:45:51 -0500

On Thu, 2001-09-13 at 16:10, Dirk Herrmann wrote:
> These error messages are the reason why the generation of code with
> TYPING_STRICTNESS=2 is not possible.  The trick with TYPING_STRICTNESS set
> to 2 is to define SCM as a struct.  This makes all of C's implicit type
> conversions impossible and is the reason why this mode allows the best
> possible type checking by the compiler. 

So can we assume that in the "real", "normal" guile libraries, SCM will now and
forever more be of a type suitable for use as a C label?  I am pretty shocked 
if 
that's true; I have always assumed that code using SCM constants as initializers
and labels was not guaranteed to work and was in fact broken code.  Of course
I have written plenty of code like that myself :) 

thanks
b.g.





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]