[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: BINDING_STACK_SIZE => SPECPDL_INDEX
From: |
Juanma Barranquero |
Subject: |
Re: BINDING_STACK_SIZE => SPECPDL_INDEX |
Date: |
Thu, 11 Jul 2002 15:08:38 +0200 |
On 11 Jul 2002 15:27:33 +0200, address@hidden (Kim F. Storm) wrote:
> For consistency, I suggest to change all occurrences of `specpdl_ptr -
> specpdl' to SPECPDL_INDEX.
OK, I'll take care of it.
> I'd suggest changing the name of those variables to `specpdl_index' or
> just `spix' (which isn't currently used anywhere) for short.
"spix" seems a bit cryptic to me.
/L/e/k/t/u
- BINDING_STACK_SIZE => SPECPDL_INDEX, Richard Stallman, 2002/07/09
- Re: BINDING_STACK_SIZE => SPECPDL_INDEX, Juanma Barranquero, 2002/07/10
- Re: BINDING_STACK_SIZE => SPECPDL_INDEX, Kim F. Storm, 2002/07/11
- Re: BINDING_STACK_SIZE => SPECPDL_INDEX, Stefan Monnier, 2002/07/11
- Re: BINDING_STACK_SIZE => SPECPDL_INDEX, Juanma Barranquero, 2002/07/11
- Re: BINDING_STACK_SIZE => SPECPDL_INDEX, Stefan Monnier, 2002/07/11
- Re: BINDING_STACK_SIZE => SPECPDL_INDEX, Juanma Barranquero, 2002/07/12
- Re: BINDING_STACK_SIZE => SPECPDL_INDEX, Kim F. Storm, 2002/07/12
- Re: BINDING_STACK_SIZE => SPECPDL_INDEX, Richard Stallman, 2002/07/12