This is the mail archive of the kawa@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the Kawa project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: misunderstanding define-constant?

From: Per Bothner <per at bothner dot com>
To: Bruce Lewis <brlewis at ALUM dot MIT dot EDU>
Cc: "Hoehle, Joerg-Cyril" <Joerg-Cyril dot Hoehle at t-systems dot com>, kawa at sources dot redhat dot com
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 09:12:10 -0800
Subject: Re: misunderstanding define-constant?
References: <9F8582E37B2EE5498E76392AEDDCD3FE07DEE1E5@G8PQD.blf01.telekom.de> <3FB5DC64.9040304@bothner.com> <nm9n0avgkni.fsf@department-of-alchemy.mit.edu>

Bruce Lewis wrote:

Do you know off the top of your head if fixing this bug would also make
constant-fold work with procedure arguments?

I'm fairly sure it wouldn't.

Or maybe it already does...I tried it a long time ago, and when it
didn't work I assumed it wasn't intended to be used that way.


It may be related to what constant-fold considers a "constant".
I guess we could extend it to consider a global function as a constant.
--
	--Per Bothner
per@bothner.com   http://per.bothner.com/

References:
- misunderstanding define-constant?
  - From: Hoehle, Joerg-Cyril
- Re: misunderstanding define-constant?
  - From: Per Bothner
- Re: misunderstanding define-constant?
  - From: Bruce Lewis

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]