[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-hackers] Would SRFI-157 (pre)support worth a consideration?
From: |
Peter Bex |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-hackers] Would SRFI-157 (pre)support worth a consideration? |
Date: |
Wed, 24 Oct 2018 08:29:32 +0200 |
User-agent: |
NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) |
On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 09:33:02PM +0200, Jörg F. Wittenberger wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> with Chicken 5 being about to be released I know there is no adding
> features now.
>
> That's why I hesitate to post at all. At the other hand I'd guess it
> might be easier to now add half the feature I'd desire than later deal
> with a binary incompatible change.
>
> Maybe it's worth to consider adding this one more "thread-local
> mutable cell" in C5 threads now. To make room for srfi-157 support in
> C5.1 or so.
I don't quite see why this should be required as part of 5.0; AFAIK
thread local mutable cells would be a completely orthogonal new feature
that could be added later.
And it's nontrivial so not something to be adding at the RC stage.
Cheers,
Peter
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature