chicken-hackers
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Chicken-hackers] inlining + identity of literals


From: Peter Bex
Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] inlining + identity of literals
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 18:51:52 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i

On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 11:09:50AM -0400, John Cowan wrote:
> Thomas Chust scripsit:
> 
> > I consider it extremely bad style to rely on the mutability of
> > literals, so I wouldn't mind if structurally equal literal constants
> > were folded, whether there is inlining involved or not.
> 
> +1.  I would never intentionally write code that mutated a literal.

+1 from me too.  Besides this, I don't know if it can be easily done,
but it would be great if the system could actually throw an error when
you tried to do that.  A mistake is easily made :)

Cheers,
Peter
-- 
http://sjamaan.ath.cx
--
"The process of preparing programs for a digital computer
 is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically
 and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic
 experience much like composing poetry or music."
                                                        -- Donald Knuth




reply via email to

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