Re: guile bugs

[Greg Badros <gjb AT cs.washington dot edu>]

Jim Blandy <jimb@red-bean.com> writes:

> > 1) SCM_BOOL_F should be 0 so it is false in C
> 
> If someone were to make this change and show me before and after
> benchmark results (see guile-modules/benchmarks), then that would help
> persuade me.
> 
> > 2) SCM should not be a long, but instead be a pointer to undefined
> > struct as we discussed before.  This would prevent misuse of an integer
> > as a Scheme value.
> 
> I'd love to see this change happen.

As numerous others have pointed out, this change (or using a union for
the same purpose) would obviate the need for #1 and be easier and safer
to change.  I think we need to push forward on this front right after a
guile-1.3.4 release (which we need soon since I hate when Scwm has to
rely on CVS guiles to be functioning... it's hard to convince people to
use stuff out of CVS).

> > 3) The checking of the argument numbers using a more sophisticated macro 
> > like SCWM_PROC and Scwm's documentation extraction system (as mentioned
> > in an email earlier this week).
> 
> In principle, I would like to switch to a docstring system.  I need to
> look this over more carefully first, though.

It sounds like Mikael has done some work to enable this.  It's
definitely unfortunate that Scwm's documentation can't link directly in
to guile's documentation... there's too much of a feeling of separation
in the two worlds when they really could all be equally well documented.

Greg