[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Smart variables, dumb variables
From: |
Marius Vollmer |
Subject: |
Re: Smart variables, dumb variables |
Date: |
14 Aug 2002 22:48:32 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 |
address@hidden writes:
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2002 at 09:35:29PM +0200, Marius Vollmer wrote:
>
> > Read-onlyness should be a property of a variable that can be detected
> > by the compiler so we wouldn't want to bury it only in the setter, I'd
> > say.
>
> For some kind of static integrity checking?
I had in mind that the compiler could use the bit to decide if it is
allowed to inline some functions (such as '+', 'car', ...) but I no
longer think that would be the right way.
Also, it would be needed for dumb variables when there are no separate
setter and getter flags, but I think we should have these two flags.
So let's forget about the read-only bit for now, I'd say.
--
GPG: D5D4E405 - 2F9B BCCC 8527 692A 04E3 331E FAF8 226A D5D4 E405
- Smart variables, dumb variables, Marius Vollmer, 2002/08/13
- Re: Smart variables, dumb variables, tomas, 2002/08/14
- Re: Smart variables, dumb variables, Marius Vollmer, 2002/08/14
- Re: Smart variables, dumb variables, tomas, 2002/08/14
- Re: Smart variables, dumb variables,
Marius Vollmer <=
- Re: Smart variables, dumb variables, rm, 2002/08/14
- Re: Smart variables, dumb variables, Marius Vollmer, 2002/08/14
- Re: Smart variables, dumb variables, rm, 2002/08/15
- Re: Smart variables, dumb variables, Lynn Winebarger, 2002/08/15
- Re: Smart variables, dumb variables, rm, 2002/08/15
- Re: Smart variables, dumb variables, Rob Browning, 2002/08/15
- Re: Smart variables, dumb variables, Marius Vollmer, 2002/08/15
- Re: Smart variables, dumb variables, rm, 2002/08/15
- Re: Smart variables, dumb variables, Marius Vollmer, 2002/08/15
- Re: Smart variables, dumb variables, rm, 2002/08/15