[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions |
Date: |
Thu, 13 Jun 2013 16:08:08 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) |
> + the operation's implementation. That way, OP can be implementated
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
implemented
> +LISP_INLINE bool
> +(LISP_INT_TAG_P) (int x)
> +{
> + return lisp_h_LISP_INT_TAG_P (x);
> +}
Can't we use something like
#define FUNCTION_OF_MACRO(fun, type_in, type_out) \
LISP_INLINE type_out (fun) (type_in x) { return lisp_h_##fun (x); }
[ I guess it depends on whether the args to FUNCTION_OF_MACRO get
macro-expanded before or after expanding the macro. ]
Other than that, it looks OK for me,
Stefan
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, (continued)
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Andreas Schwab, 2013/06/06
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Stefan Monnier, 2013/06/06
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Paul Eggert, 2013/06/08
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Paul Eggert, 2013/06/09
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Stefan Monnier, 2013/06/09
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Paul Eggert, 2013/06/13
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions,
Stefan Monnier <=
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Paul Eggert, 2013/06/15
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Stefan Monnier, 2013/06/15
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Paul Eggert, 2013/06/17
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Jan Djärv, 2013/06/09
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Paul Eggert, 2013/06/09
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Jan Djärv, 2013/06/09
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Juanma Barranquero, 2013/06/09
- bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Jan Djärv, 2013/06/09
bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions, Barry OReilly, 2013/06/10