Re: `thunk?' broken

[Dirk Herrmann]

On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, Martin Grabmueller wrote:

> Looking at the implementation of `thunk?' (procs.c:238), I see:
> 
>       switch (SCM_TYP7 (obj))
>       {
>       case scm_tcs_closures:
>         if (SCM_NULLP (SCM_CAR (SCM_CODE (obj))))
>           return SCM_BOOL_T;
>       case scm_tc7_subr_0:
>       case scm_tc7_subr_1o:
>       case scm_tc7_lsubr:
>       case scm_tc7_rpsubr:
>       case scm_tc7_asubr:
> #ifdef CCLO
>       case scm_tc7_cclo:
> #endif
>         return SCM_BOOL_T;
> 
> Isn't there a `break' or `return' or something missing after the first
> case?  I'm not sure about the correct fix, because I don't understand
> all the procedure types in Guile yet.

You are right:  for the case of closures the code should be
  if (SCM_NULLP (SCM_CAR (SCM_CODE (obj))))
    return SCM_BOOL_T;
  else
    return SCM_BOOL_F;
or shorter
  return SCM_BOOL (SCM_NULLP (SCM_CAR (SCM_CODE (obj))));
For the other cases it is OK.

Best regards,
Dirk Herrmann