[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: lily-guile updates and CG: "Scheme->C interface" section. (issue 491

From: bordage . bertrand
Subject: Re: lily-guile updates and CG: "Scheme->C interface" section. (issue 4917044)
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 20:22:27 +0000

On 2011/08/19 18:04:38, Carl wrote:
THanks for doing this!

And thanks for this excellent review!

I have some comments about the docs.  I think they're too tutorial,
and I think
the exhaustive lists are unwieldy and should be eliminated.  THe
source should
be the reference.

You're right.  Specifying the meaning of the prefixes "ly_", "robust_",
... should be enough, but requires to unify these functions (name and
default value).  As you can see, I made a few changes in this direction.
 If you think this is a good idea, I can unify the whole interface.  Of
course, there's a lot of downstream name changes to do.  And maybe make
a small changelog somewhere for the developpers.

I think the code changes should be separated from the doc changes.

This is two commits I uploaded at once.  Since I wrote the small
references according to the changes made to the C files, I thought this
would be easier to understand.

Also, the Guile API says :

The type of the return value of a C function that corresponds to a
function is always SCM. In the descriptions below, types are therefore
omitted but for the return value and for the arguments.



Ok, so there's no logical error.  Forgive me.
The code expresses that any number between -1 and 1 is a valid
direction, not
just the integers -1, 0 and 1.

I think this change should not be pushed.

So I guess the scm_to_int has to be changed for scm_to_double in these
lily/ if (scm_is_integer (s))
I think integer is correct here.  We don't have axes that are halfway
Xand Y.

This could be very nice!

I totally agree with anything else.
I'll make a new patch set before Tuesday.


reply via email to

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