[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [MIT-Scheme-devel] two changes to push
From: |
Taylor R Campbell |
Subject: |
Re: [MIT-Scheme-devel] two changes to push |
Date: |
Sat, 19 Sep 2009 17:54:14 -0400 |
User-agent: |
IMAIL/1.21; Edwin/3.116; MIT-Scheme/7.7.90.+ |
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2009 09:46:16 -0700
From: Joe Marshall <address@hidden>
I did integrate-operator because the argument `object' is duplicated.
The slightly better job is offset by the potential for bugs later on.
I didn't realize until you said this that DEFINE -> DEFINE-INTEGRABLE
changed the semantics of programs. Is this worth the trouble? For
those cases when it doesn't change semantics, does it actually improve
the code that the compiler generates?
- [MIT-Scheme-devel] two changes to push, Joe Marshall, 2009/09/10
- Re: [MIT-Scheme-devel] two changes to push, Chris Hanson, 2009/09/11
- Re: [MIT-Scheme-devel] two changes to push, Joe Marshall, 2009/09/12
- Re: [MIT-Scheme-devel] two changes to push,
Taylor R Campbell <=
- Re: [MIT-Scheme-devel] two changes to push, Chris Hanson, 2009/09/19
- Re: [MIT-Scheme-devel] two changes to push, Taylor R Campbell, 2009/09/19
- Re: [MIT-Scheme-devel] two changes to push, Joe Marshall, 2009/09/19
- Re: [MIT-Scheme-devel] two changes to push, Chris Hanson, 2009/09/19
- Re: [MIT-Scheme-devel] two changes to push, Taylor R Campbell, 2009/09/20
- Re: [MIT-Scheme-devel] two changes to push, Joe Marshall, 2009/09/20
- Re: [MIT-Scheme-devel] two changes to push, Taylor R Campbell, 2009/09/20
- Re: [MIT-Scheme-devel] two changes to push, Chris Hanson, 2009/09/20
- Re: [MIT-Scheme-devel] two changes to push, Chris Hanson, 2009/09/20
- Re: [MIT-Scheme-devel] two changes to push, Joe Marshall, 2009/09/20