[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: SCM_CALL_N
From: |
Marius Vollmer |
Subject: |
Re: SCM_CALL_N |
Date: |
25 Jun 2001 16:33:19 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.0.102 |
Neil Jerram <address@hidden> writes:
> Then SCM_CALL_N and SCM_APPLY_N would completely encapsulate the
> optimization use of scm_listofnull, I think.
Yes, I like this, too.
However, should we use macros for this or functions? Functions would
make it easier to maintain backward compatibility and would stand out
as something special in the code. But are we concerned about binary
compatibility yet? Hmm, I don't think so.
- SCM_CALL_N, Keisuke Nishida, 2001/06/22
- Re: SCM_CALL_N, Neil Jerram, 2001/06/22
- Re: SCM_CALL_N, Dirk Herrmann, 2001/06/22
- Re: SCM_CALL_N, Dale P. Smith, 2001/06/22
- Re: SCM_CALL_N, Neil Jerram, 2001/06/24
- Re: SCM_CALL_N, Keisuke Nishida, 2001/06/24
- Re: SCM_CALL_N, Neil Jerram, 2001/06/24
- Re: SCM_CALL_N, Rob Browning, 2001/06/24
- Re: SCM_CALL_N, Neil Jerram, 2001/06/24
- Re: SCM_CALL_N, Keisuke Nishida, 2001/06/25
- Re: SCM_CALL_N,
Marius Vollmer <=
- Re: SCM_CALL_N, Marius Vollmer, 2001/06/25
- Re: SCM_CALL_N, Rob Browning, 2001/06/25
- Re: SCM_CALL_N, Keisuke Nishida, 2001/06/25
- Re: SCM_CALL_N, Marius Vollmer, 2001/06/25
- Re: SCM_CALL_N, Lars J. Aas, 2001/06/26
- Re: SCM_CALL_N, Dirk Herrmann, 2001/06/26
- Re: SCM_CALL_N, Lars J. Aas, 2001/06/26
- Re: SCM_CALL_N, Rob Browning, 2001/06/26
- Re: SCM_CALL_N, Lars J. Aas, 2001/06/26
- Re: SCM_CALL_N, Neil Jerram, 2001/06/26