Hi, Andy Wingo <wi...@pobox.com> skribis:
> On Tue 03 Jul 2012 23:47, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > >>> This should be fixed. Otherwise it's impossible to document in any >>> sane fashion. >>> >>> Suggestion: change scm_to_pointer to SCM_POINTER_VALUE. WDYT? >> >> I’m happy with this change. Mark? >> >> (Back then, I was skeptical about the usefulness of the C pointer API. >> I have since used ‘SCM_POINTER_VALUE’ and ‘scm_from_pointer’ in >> Guile-GCC, which uses a mixed dynamic/static FFI, and for good reasons.) > > On second thought, let's leave it in. It is terribly confusing, but > alternatives are worse. We could also document ‘SCM_POINTER_VALUE’, WDYT? Ludo’.
