[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Chicken-users] fixnum-specific math operators patch

From: Will M Farr
Subject: Re: [Chicken-users] fixnum-specific math operators patch
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2006 12:42:57 -0400

Kon (and others),

On Sep 1, 2006, at 10:59 AM, Kon Lovett wrote:

But Felix's point about 'ensure' should help w/ syntax forms that have domain & range restrictions.

Yeah---that would be The Right Way (TM). (And it allows for more situation-adapted tests.)

By the way (maybe felix can answer this), if I define a structure with

(define-record foo bar baz)

does it define the accessors and setters as

(define (foo-bar f)
  (ensure foo? f)
  (block-ref f 0))

I'm curious because I've read in other places (one of Manuel Serrano's papers on type inference) that type checks can take up a large fraction of the runtime, and it would be nice to eliminate as many as possible in (unsafe) code.


reply via email to

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