Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Re: make check failing

[Felix]

> 
> I'm thinking bugs like indexing a pixel or a database record at position
> 1.5 due to a mistaken offset calculation.  I've made mistakes like that
> in the past and would like those to be caught early.  I know we can
> always add additional checks in wrapper code around the call, but I think
> that if I'm asking for an integer it makes sense if it complains when
> passed some fractional value.

What happens when some integer computation involving fixnums ends up with
something like 123.0000000001 ? Must I always wrap my arguments in "round" ?

This doesn't feel right to me, but I'll push the modified patch, if you insist,
because I can't bring up more convincing arguments. It just doesn't feel 
right...


cheers,
felix