Re: scm_bits_t / scm_ubits_t

[Marius Vollmer]

"Jacques A. Vidrine" <address@hidden> writes:

> union scm_word {
>         unsigned long    tag;
>         void            *ptr;
>         long             sl;
>         unsigned long    ul;
> };

Yeah, it's tempting to use a union, but I think we had performance
problems with it.  It didn't nearly optimize as well as using an
integral type.  Or something.  When you set SCM_TYPING_STRICTNESS to
2, you get a definition for SCM that uses a union, but Guile can't be
fully compiled with that setting.