[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: define-void-function or define-procedure ?
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: define-void-function or define-procedure ? |
Date: |
Wed, 19 Oct 2011 23:09:42 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.90 (gnu/linux) |
Carl Sorensen <address@hidden> writes:
> On 10/19/11 3:26 AM, "David Kastrup" <address@hidden> wrote:
>>
>>\void #(hashq-set! ...)
>>\void #(hashq-set! ...)
>>
>>rather than
>>
>>\ignore #(hashq-set! ...)
>>\ignore #(hashq-set! ...)
>>
>>It's a bit C-ish, but not all that bad, and it fits with
>>define-void-function.
>
> \returnUnspecified #(hashq-set! ...)
>
> \scmUnspecified #(hashq-set! ...)
>
> \ignoreReturn #(hashq-set! ...)
>
> After all I can think of, I think \void is probably the best.
I am not enthused about this particular consequence of auto-exporting
Scheme expressions. I currently don't see a better way of handling it,
and it has flagged more bad code than false positives when I tried it.
But I would be quite surprised if it did not trigger regressions with
existing previously valid and reasonable code.
--
David Kastrup
- define-void-function or define-procedure ?, David Kastrup, 2011/10/19
- Re: define-void-function or define-procedure ?, Bertrand Bordage, 2011/10/19
- Message not available
- Re: define-void-function or define-procedure ?, David Kastrup, 2011/10/19
- Re: define-void-function or define-procedure ?, Carl Sorensen, 2011/10/19
- Re: define-void-function or define-procedure ?,
David Kastrup <=
- Re: define-void-function or define-procedure ?, David Kastrup, 2011/10/19
- Re: define-void-function or define-procedure ?, Graham Percival, 2011/10/19
- Re: define-void-function or define-procedure ?, Carl Sorensen, 2011/10/19
- Re: define-void-function or define-procedure ?, David Kastrup, 2011/10/20