On Aug 12, 2013, at 2:11 PM, Peter Bex <peter....@xs4all.nl> wrote: >> Looks useful. Could it perhaps be more useful to make the argument >> to C_resize_trace_buffer a regular size_t instead of a Scheme fixnum? >> That might make it slightly more usable from an embedded situation.
Sure -- but C_trace_buffer_size is an int. That's why I used int ;) I could certainly fix that at the source, shall I? > Also, why is a maximum size necessary, and why is it so small? It's not. But there's a minimum size, so I figured naturally there should be a maximum size, if only to eliminate accidentally or maliciously resizing the trace buffer to an arbitrary extent. There are also max caps on some other resources. Since it's a ring buffer, I suppose there are no *performance* problems with a trace buffer of large size, just potentially memory usage. The default is also arbitrary. I could either eliminate the limit or raise the default, your call. Actually, I just realized the arg isn't checked to be a fixnum. I'll change that when I incorporate any suggestions. Jim _______________________________________________ Chicken-hackers mailing list Chicken-hackers@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers
