[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Likely a good frog project for someone with C knowledge
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: Likely a good frog project for someone with C knowledge |
Date: |
Wed, 17 Aug 2011 10:33:46 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:
> Bertrand Bordage <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> 2011/8/17 David Kastrup <address@hidden>
>>
>> Bertrand Bordage <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>>
>> > This would be great if Han-Wen decides to keep it like that.
>> > Otherwise there is really a lot of work, with many shortcuts to
>> > define.
>> > to_boolean (scm_is_pair (x))
>>
>>
>> That one would be wrong since scm_is_pair already returns a C
>> boolean.
>>
>>
>> I was thinking about scm_pair_p ()...
>> This is typically the kind of mistakes that should be solved.
>> Shame on me, I won't do it again.
>>
>> Where did you find SCM_CONSP ?
>> I don't see it in guile's reference. Maybe something to add to the CG
>> ?
>
> Guile reference manual for Guile 1.8, "Pair data". It is even indexed.
> What version of the Guile manual are you using? To quote:
>
> Guile implements pairs by mapping the CAR and CDR of a pair directly
> into the two words of the cell.
>
> -- Macro: int SCM_CONSP (SCM X)
> Return non-zero iff X is a Scheme pair object.
>
> -- Macro: int SCM_NCONSP (SCM X)
> The complement of SCM_CONSP.
However, I found that as a reasonably dependable heuristic, "functions"
scm_is_* are implemented as macros after all. That is probably why we
have scm_is_eq, but not scm_is_equal which needs to be done by something
like scm_is_true (scm_equal_p (...)) instead. Or by ly_is_equal (which
we have).
So here I would just use scm_is_pair and !scm_is_pair.
--
David Kastrup
- Re: Likely a good frog project for someone with C knowledge, (continued)
- Re: Likely a good frog project for someone with C knowledge, David Kastrup, 2011/08/16
- Re: Likely a good frog project for someone with C knowledge, David Kastrup, 2011/08/16
- Re: Likely a good frog project for someone with C knowledge, Reinhold Kainhofer, 2011/08/16
- Re: Likely a good frog project for someone with C knowledge, Reinhold Kainhofer, 2011/08/16
- Re: Likely a good frog project for someone with C knowledge, David Kastrup, 2011/08/16
- Re: Likely a good frog project for someone with C knowledge, David Kastrup, 2011/08/16
- Re: Likely a good frog project for someone with C knowledge, Bertrand Bordage, 2011/08/16
- Re: Likely a good frog project for someone with C knowledge, David Kastrup, 2011/08/16
- Re: Likely a good frog project for someone with C knowledge, Bertrand Bordage, 2011/08/17
- Re: Likely a good frog project for someone with C knowledge, David Kastrup, 2011/08/17
- Re: Likely a good frog project for someone with C knowledge,
David Kastrup <=
Re: Likely a good frog project for someone with C knowledge, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2011/08/16
- Re: Likely a good frog project for someone with C knowledge, David Kastrup, 2011/08/16
- Re: Likely a good frog project for someone with C knowledge, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2011/08/16
- Re: Likely a good frog project for someone with C knowledge, Werner LEMBERG, 2011/08/16
- Re: Likely a good frog project for someone with C knowledge, Graham Percival, 2011/08/17
- Re: Likely a good frog project for someone with C knowledge, Trevor Daniels, 2011/08/17
- Re: Likely a good frog project for someone with C knowledge, Ian Hulin, 2011/08/17
- Re: Likely a good frog project for someone with C knowledge, David Kastrup, 2011/08/17
- Re: Likely a good frog project for someone with C knowledge, Reinhold Kainhofer, 2011/08/17
- Re: Likely a good frog project for someone with C knowledge, David Kastrup, 2011/08/17