Re: gh_lookup() equivalent

[stefan]

Hi,

your proposal is just what I am using myself at the time as a replacement.
Thus the implementation is not the problem.  My actual question is due to
the comment:

   [FIXME:
   should this be SCM_UNSPECIFIED?  Can a symbol ever legitimately be
   bound to SCM_UNDEFINED or SCM_UNSPECIFIED?  What is the difference?
   -twp]

If you can gurantee the return value cannot be bound to a symbol you can
use the replacement code you proposed.  If not we would need a further
argument *and* a return value.

Cheers,
        address@hidden