Re: miniPicoLisp Trasnients

[Alexander Burger]

Hi Doug,

 (de foo (x) x)
 ...
 (de baz (X) X)

Hmm, this looks very much as if the call

   isIntern(tail(y), Transient)

doesn't work for some reason. It seems that the two X symbols are not
the same.

Strange that it works for 'Internal' symbols.


 (setq V 456)
 at the top level (not in a definition) that works as expected

Again strange. It shouldn't matter how the symbol is used (globally or
bound locally).


 I wonder why it might not see X as a transient? (Er, I'm not even
 sure if transient is the the right terminology here.)

Yes, transient is correct.

I suspect that the above effects are partially random. The reason must
have to do with the index tree handling in isIntern() and intern().
Perhaps again some alignment or pointer-tag problem?

Cheers,
- Alex
-- 
UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe

miniPicoLisp Trasnients

[Doug Snead]

Alex, 

I have a porting-related question for you. 

After more android testing I'm finding a problem with (transient) variables  
... (I think).

When I try a definition like this,

(de foo (x) x)

no problem,

(foo 123)

returns 123 as expected.


But when I try it this way:

(de baz (X) X)

(baz 123)

I should get 123 but instead I get:

X

However, if I try 

(setq V 456)

at the top level (not in a definition) that works as expected, and evaluating 
V later returns 456

I wonder why it might not see X as a transient?  (Er, I'm not even sure if 
transient is the the right terminology here.)

Does anything leap out at you there?  :-) 

Cheers,

Doug

-- 
UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe