Andy Wingo <[email protected]> skribis: > I agree that we would do well to allow bytevectors wherever an argument > type is a pointer. It avoids an allocation in a very common case > without changing the expressiveness of the interface or adding > significant additional overhead.
I find it somewhat inelegant, though. This would be less of a problem if we had “immediate pointers” [0]. Would the retagging in 2.1 allow this? (At FOSDEM, Luca Saiu rightfully noted that we could use 4-bit tags instead of 3-bit tags on 64-bit arches, which would give us the needed room here.) Ludo’. [0] http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2011-01/msg00159.html
