Re: The relationship between SCM and scm_t_bits.

[Marius Vollmer]

Marius Vollmer <address@hidden> writes:

> Hi,
>
> I just got confused about our two 'fundamental' types, SCM and
> scm_t_bits.

Ok, so this is what I have done now:

    * Changes to the C interface

    ** SCM_CELL_WORD_LOC has been deprecated.

    Use the new macro SCM_CELL_OBJECT_LOC instead, which return a
    pointer to a SCM, as opposed to a pointer to a scm_t_bits.

    This was done to allow the correct use of pointers into the Scheme
    heap.  Previously, the heap words were of type scm_t_bits and
    local variables and function arguments were of type SCM, making it
    non-standards-conformant to have a pointer that can point to both.

    ** New macros SCM_SMOB_DATA_2, SM_SMOB_DATA_3, etc.

    These macros should be used instead of SCM_CELL_WORD_2/3 to access
    the second and third words of double smobs.  Likewise for
    SCM_SET_SMOB_DATA_2 and SCM_SET_SMOB_DATA_3.

    Also, there is SCM_SMOB_FLAGS and SCM_SET_SMOB_FLAGS that should
    be used to get and set the 16 exra bits in the zeroth word of a
    smob.

    And finally, there is SCM_SMOB_OBJECT and SCM_SMOB_SET_OBJECT for
    accesing the first immediate word of a smob as a SCM value, and
    there is SCM_SMOB_OBJECT_LOC for getting a pointer to the first
    immediate smob words.  Like wise for SCM_SMOB_OBJECT_2, etc.

I've also updated the smob documentation in the manual.