Re: more compilation failures: -DSCM_DEBUG_TYPING_STRICTNESS=2

[Neil Jerram]

address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:

>>> 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.

I've never used the non-default STRICTNESS either, and static
initialization sounds like a nice feature; so I'm also happy with
blowing away STRICTNESS 2.

Then, given that you (Ken) think that STRICTNESS 0 doesn't work
either, I'd favour hardcoding the STRICTNESS 1 macros and then
discarding the whole STRICTNESS concept.

     Neil