[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Chicken-users] type extension ("inheritance") and define-record

From: Thomas Chust
Subject: Re: [Chicken-users] type extension ("inheritance") and define-record
Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 20:13:14 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110708 Firefox/5.0 SeaMonkey/2.2

Pedro Henrique Antunes de Oliveira wrote:
> Any reason why that happens?
> [...]
> On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Thomas Chust <address@hidden> wrote:
>> if the original record was defined in a different module than the
>> derived one, setting those binding from the original module to other
>> values may not be visible to the original module and other code using
>> it, depending on compiler optimization settings used when translating
>> the original module.

It happens simply because some compiler optimizations rely on the
assumption that a variable is never set! outside the module that defines it.

It is common practice to adhere to this convention in Scheme programming
and some dialects of Scheme, for example Racket, even enforce it in general.


When C++ is your hammer, every problem looks like your thumb.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]