[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-users] read-byte, etc.
From: |
felix winkelmann |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-users] read-byte, etc. |
Date: |
Thu, 20 Apr 2006 07:26:25 +0200 |
On 4/20/06, Hans Bulfone <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> - the compiler normally assumes that +, -, read-char, etc. are not globally
> redefined and resolves the bindings at compile time
> - the numbers egg can redefine +, -, etc. because code that uses it is
> compiled with (declare (not standard-bindings + - ...))
> - read-char can be redefined in a syntax-case module that imports the
> utf8 module because it creates a local binding.
> - but importing the utf8 module into the toplevel should not be able
> to change read-char for code compiled with usual-integrations,
> even if that code is loaded after the utf8 module is imported.
The usual-integrations declaration only replaces _certain_ standard
(and some non-standard) procedure-calls with certain internal
ones, but not all.
> somehow i don't feel comfortable with using ##sys#... procedures when
> not really needed, so i'm not using it so far.
That's sensible. The internal procedures and their interface may change
from release to release.
cheers,
felix
- Re: [Chicken-users] read-byte, etc., Hans Bulfone, 2006/04/03
- Re: [Chicken-users] read-byte, etc., Alex Shinn, 2006/04/04
- Re: [Chicken-users] read-byte, etc., Hans Bulfone, 2006/04/06
- Re: [Chicken-users] read-byte, etc., F. Wittenberger, 2006/04/06
- Re: [Chicken-users] read-byte, etc., Alex Shinn, 2006/04/06
- Re: [Chicken-users] read-byte, etc., Benedikt Rosenau, 2006/04/07
- Re: [Chicken-users] read-byte, etc., felix winkelmann, 2006/04/10
- Re: [Chicken-users] read-byte, etc., Hans Bulfone, 2006/04/19
- Re: [Chicken-users] read-byte, etc.,
felix winkelmann <=