On Tue, Jan 01, 2013 at 04:43:22PM -0500, John Cowan wrote: > Peter Bex scripsit: > > These optimization hints aren't user-defined either, so I'm not sure I > > follow your line of reasoning. If an implementation provides a SRFI-0 > > feature that's the name of the implementation this will be easy of > > course. > > I'm still not following you. As I see it, a cond-expand feature is the > implementation telling you what it can do, whereas these declarations > are you telling the implementation what it should do. Can you explain > how these purposes can be neatly conflated?
Oh, that's simple really. If you know an implementation has a particular optimization, you can expand to a library declaration that controls that optimization. Something like: (cond-expand ((chicken gambit) (inline foo bar))) Cheers, Peter -- http://sjamaan.ath.cx _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list Scheme-reports@scheme-reports.org http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
