bug#11935: XINT etc. should be functions

[Stefan Monnier]

> +   the operation's implementation.  That way, OP can be implementated
                                                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
                                                           implemented

> +LISP_INLINE bool
> +(LISP_INT_TAG_P) (int x)
> +{
> +  return lisp_h_LISP_INT_TAG_P (x);
> +}

Can't we use something like

#define FUNCTION_OF_MACRO(fun, type_in, type_out) \
  LISP_INLINE type_out (fun) (type_in x) { return lisp_h_##fun (x); }

[ I guess it depends on whether the args to FUNCTION_OF_MACRO get
  macro-expanded before or after expanding the macro. ]

Other than that, it looks OK for me,


        Stefan