Hi Cesar, > You can disagree, but cannot keep disagreeing and maintain the > documentation related to the implementation "Creates or extracts data > structures, suitable to be passed to or returned from native C functions."
Exactly. Of course this buffer, filled with any data, can always be passed to a C function. As my example in the previous mail showed, you can well pack strings with 8 bytes on a single store instruction, at a convenient offset. Why should a C function receiving this perfectly normal string complain? > If the idea is as you describe, then the doc should be reformed and the > user instructed to check the needs according to the call he/she intends, on > the other hand. Hmm, isn't this always necessary? Check what a called function (C or not) needs? Which sentence in the doc (you mean the references of 'native' and 'struct'?) is not correct? > If both ways of doing the scruct are equally useful in picolisp (which I I think they are not equally useful. 'native' and 'struct' do exactly what the programmer tells them. Nothing tricky or clever behind the scenes. I do not want them to insert bytes based on assumptions. This would violate the spirit of PicoLisp. Keep the programmer in control! ☺/ A!ex -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe
