Hi, "Kjetil S. Matheussen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I haven't heard of the "uo" field before, but at least using a SMOB > is really inconvenient, and using an unsigned long for storing > pointers is really convenient. (BTW. How does swig and gwrap handle > pointers?) G-Wrap has "wrapped C types" (WCTs): http://www.nongnu.org/g-wrap/manual/Wrapping-a-C-Pointer-Type.html IIRC, it uses a SMOB containing additional information behind the scenes. > I agree with Maciek that it would at least be mind-comforting to have > functions like scm_to_ptr/etc, although not strictly necessary, > since using integers works just fine. `scm_{to,from}_uintptr ()' could be handy (patches welcome!). That said, using a Scheme integer to represent a pointer wouldn't be efficient (pointers would likely translate to bignums). Thanks, Ludovic.
