Charles Day <[email protected]> writes:
> Either that or gnc_guid2scm(guidnull()) ??
> I'm not sure why it is the way it is, nor am I sure what it SHOULD be.
> SCM_BOOL_F probably is correct.
>
> qof_instance_get_guid() can return a normal GUID, guid_null(), or NULL (upon
> failure). So it seems there ought to be a way for the caller (Scheme) to
> distinguish between the last two. Having #f returned to Scheme seems like a
> natural fit, as #f is returned by many Scheme procedures to indicate a bad
> result.
Okay, then make it SCM_BOOL_F
> A second issue is how GUID's are currently handled within Scheme. To
> represent, say, a C split in Scheme, a record is filled out with the values of
> each field (e.g. date, amount, account). The "account" is stored in Scheme by
> use of its GUID, which may not exist if the split has not yet been assigned to
> an account. How do we intend to represent this situation in Scheme? I don't
> see any code that handles this, and #f would seem to be appropriate.
Well, GUID == NULL -> SCM_BOOL_F seems to continue to work here.
-derek
--
Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB)
URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/ PP-ASEL-IA N1NWH
[email protected] PGP key available
_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
