[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Chicken-hackers] regression - probably in let*

From: Jörg F. Wittenberger
Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] regression - probably in let*
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 18:27:54 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux armv7l; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.7.0

Am 18.06.2015 um 15:00 schrieb address@hidden:
>> thanks for your confirmation.  So it's -strict-types.  Maybe the test
>> should go into the test suite to prevent the issue sneaking into future
>> releases.
>> (As for -unsafe: that's actually reasonable behavior.  After all -unsafe
>> was requested.)
> -strict-types is dangerous and unintuitive,

Dangerous: I see, I've just been caught.  Though it did work perfectly
for me for maybe five years or so.

But what's unintuitive about it?

> I recommend not to use it.

I don't know exactly how much it does save me actually.  (I developed
the habit to switch it on for frequently run code having type
declarations and leave it on if nothing breaks.)

But if it's really better not being used, why is it still supported by


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]