Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Mostly fix #1604

[megane]

address@hidden writes:

[...]
>
> Shouldn't the types.db specialization for scheme#= be applied
> here? Or can't it figure out the ffixnum types of the arguments?
> Even though it is slightly dangerous, the scrutinizer _could_ assume
> arguments to numerical primitives are fixnums in fixnum mode...

That's right, the scrutinizer can't figure out the types. The type of n
for the first scheme#= call is *. The call enforces the type to number.
So the second scheme#= is called with (number fixnum). There's no
specialization for that either.

Wouldn't that kind of assuming lead to hard to debug bugs?

If the scrutinizer could infer types for functions then I think that
would be fine. You'd get a warning somewhere.

>
> felix