Re: SCM_CALL_N

[Marius Vollmer]

Neil Jerram <address@hidden> writes:

> Then SCM_CALL_N and SCM_APPLY_N would completely encapsulate the
> optimization use of scm_listofnull, I think.

Yes, I like this, too.

However, should we use macros for this or functions?  Functions would
make it easier to maintain backward compatibility and would stand out
as something special in the code.  But are we concerned about binary
compatibility yet?  Hmm, I don't think so.