[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: mutating C binding arguments?
From: |
Michael Livshin |
Subject: |
Re: mutating C binding arguments? |
Date: |
04 Oct 2000 20:02:37 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.0807 (Gnus v5.8.7) XEmacs/21.1 (20 Minutes to Nikko) |
Michael Livshin <address@hidden> writes:
> if you are serious about this, call `gh_lookup("values")' once when
> initializing your program, keep the result in a global variable and
> use that -- or else things might be slower than you expect them to
> be.
argh. one point that I forgot. don't do this:
global_values_proc = gh_lookup("values");
instead, do this:
global_values_proc = scm_permanent_object(gh_lookup("values"));
doesn't _really_ matter in this case (since `values' sits in the root
module and isn't likely to go away) but better style anyway.
--
Paranoid schizophrenics outnumber their enemies at least two to one.
- mutating C binding arguments?, Lars J. Aas, 2000/10/03
- Re: mutating C binding arguments?, Michael Livshin, 2000/10/03
- Re: mutating C binding arguments?, Lars J. Aas, 2000/10/04
- Re: mutating C binding arguments?, Michael Livshin, 2000/10/04
- Re: mutating C binding arguments?, Lars J. Aas, 2000/10/04
- Re: mutating C binding arguments?, Michael Livshin, 2000/10/04
- Re: mutating C binding arguments?, Lars J. Aas, 2000/10/04
- Re: mutating C binding arguments?, Michael Livshin, 2000/10/04
- Re: mutating C binding arguments?,
Michael Livshin <=
- Re: mutating C binding arguments?, Lars J. Aas, 2000/10/04
- Re: mutating C binding arguments?, Michael Livshin, 2000/10/04
- Re: mutating C binding arguments?, Lars J. Aas, 2000/10/05
- Re: mutating C binding arguments?, Michael Livshin, 2000/10/05