Re: [PATCH] Fix continuation problems on IA64.

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi,

Neil Jerram <address@hidden> writes:

> address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:

>> This breaks ABI compatibility on IA64, but if Guile wasn't usable on
>> IA64 (was it?) that's probably not a problem.
>
> Good point, and I don't think it was completely unusable before, so
> this could be an issue.  The problems were sufficient to break
> Lilypond on IA64, but many simpler programs could have been fine.
>
> Who is ABI compatibility an issue for?  If it's only the distros,
> we're probably OK, as I believe they won't have promoted something
> that failed "make check".

If we change the ABI, we should increase `LIBGUILE_INTERFACE_CURRENT'
and set `AGE' to zero because it's not going to be
backward-compatible---and we can't do that only for IA64,
unfortunately...

> For people building their own Guile libs, can we cover this by a
> sentence in the next release notes, to say that programs using
> scm_i_thread should be recompiled?

Programs necessarily access it, through `SCM_I_CURRENT_THREAD', etc.

> I'm happy with adding SCM_NORETURN; but why the SCM_API?  I don't
> think a libguile application should call scm_ia64_longjmp itself, so
> do not intend to document it.

Right, but `SCM_API' is just `extern' (except on Windows), which is
"normal" in such a declaration; and whether declared `extern' or not,
the symbol will be exported anyway.

Thanks,
Ludovic.