> > 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 _______________________________________________ Chicken-hackers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers
