Re: SCM_STATIC_ALIGNED_ARRAY

[Andy Wingo]

Heya,

On Mon 01 Mar 2010 17:33, address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:

> "Andy Wingo" <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> commit cee1d22c3c10b1892c82a5758ef69cd6fc9aba31
>> Author: Andy Wingo <address@hidden>
>> Date:   Mon Feb 22 23:00:19 2010 +0100
>>
>>    actually capture partial continuations
>
> [...]
>
>> +#ifdef SCM_ALIGNED
>> +#define SCM_DECLARE_STATIC_ALIGNED_ARRAY(type, sym)\
>> +static const type sym[]
>> +#define SCM_STATIC_ALIGNED_ARRAY(alignment, type, sym)\
>> +static SCM_ALIGNED (alignment) const type sym[]
>> +#else
>> +#define SCM_DECLARE_STATIC_ALIGNED_ARRAY(type, sym)\
>> +static type *sym
>> +#define SCM_STATIC_ALIGNED_ARRAY(alignment, type, sym)                  \
>> +SCM_SNARF_INIT(sym = scm_malloc (sizeof(sym##__unaligned) + alignment - 1); 
>> \
>
> ‘scm_gc_malloc_pointerless ()’ could be used here.  It always returns
> 8-byte aligned areas [0], which should allow some of the alignment
> twiddling to be removed.  What do you think?

Done

> Also, the indentation, spacing, etc., are not GCS-conforming.

I tweaked it a little, but my instincts here are bad. If you still care,
please commit a proper fix :)

Andy
-- 
http://wingolog.org/