[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: scm_bits_t / scm_ubits_t

From: Dirk Herrmann
Subject: Re: scm_bits_t / scm_ubits_t
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 10:11:47 +0200 (MEST)

On 31 May 2001, Marius Vollmer wrote:

> I think we should have
>     typedef uintptr_t scm_t_bits;
>     typedef intptr_t scm_t_length;
>     typedef uintptr_t scm_t_ulength;

Agreed with respect to scm_t_bits.  But, why aren't lengths just size_t
variables?  Maybe I am wrong here, but I thought that size_t was a type
that resembles the amount of available memory.  Since lengths of strings
and any other datatype in guile can not exceed memory, there is no need of
a separate scm_t_length and scm_t_ulength types.

Best regards,
Dirk Herrmann

reply via email to

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