[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Introducing `cond-feature'
From: |
Kevin Ryde |
Subject: |
Re: Introducing `cond-feature' |
Date: |
Tue, 12 Dec 2006 09:08:49 +1100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) |
address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>
> Performing this kind of optimization somehow breaks the
> compilation/execution boundary (see the links Rob posted): `provide?' is
> just a regular procedure, and as such its invocations should not be
> evaluated at compilation-time (the same goes for `defined?').
It's generally a good thing for a compiler to look into constant
expressions and reason based on them. In fact I'd much rather have
the compiler thinking about my constants than have macros. Macros
seem like a good idea but 9 times out of 10 they're not really.
- Introducing `cond-feature', Ludovic Courtès, 2006/12/05
- Re: Introducing `cond-feature', Kevin Ryde, 2006/12/05
- Re: Introducing `cond-feature', Ludovic Courtès, 2006/12/06
- Re: Introducing `cond-feature', Kevin Ryde, 2006/12/08
- Re: Introducing `cond-feature',
Kevin Ryde <=
- Re: Introducing `cond-feature', Ludovic Courtès, 2006/12/12
- Re: Introducing `cond-feature', Kevin Ryde, 2006/12/13
- Re: Introducing `cond-feature', Ludovic Courtès, 2006/12/14
- Re: Introducing `cond-feature', Rob Browning, 2006/12/15
Re: Introducing `cond-feature', Rob Browning, 2006/12/05