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