Re: more compilation failures: -DSCM_DEBUG_TYPING_STRICTNESS=2

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi!

Ken Raeburn <address@hidden> writes:

> In the Guile case, I'm a tiny bit concerned about some of the pointer/
> int games played (e.g., I'm pretty sure C99 does not guarantee that
> you can convert an arbitrary uintptr_t value to pointer and back and
> be guaranteed of getting the original value... but I don't know of a
> platform that actually violates that assumption), but only a tiny bit.

Really?  I think the whole purpose of `uintptr_t' is to allow that,
isn't it?

>> Anyway, in the meantime, we can conditionalize static initialization
>> stuff from bdw-gc-static-alloc on STRICTNESS == 0 and keep everyone
>> happy.
>>
>> Does that sound reasonable?
>
> Sure.  Actually, STRICTNESS=1 is the default -- 0 makes SCM an
> integer, 1 makes it a pointer to a struct, which adds a little more
> type safety, and 2 makes it a union, which breaks casting,
> initialization, etc.

Oh, right.

Thanks,
Ludo'.