Re: Guile FFI: resizable vector problem

Tom Lord <lord-1tv/[email protected]> writes:

> I think that initially, the portable FFI should not deal with
> buckybits at all.   If C code says to Scheme "Hey, gimme that
> character converted to a C value", and the character happens to have
> non-0 buckybits, then Scheme should reply "Sorry, can't do it."
>
> The rationale for that is that so few implementations deal with
> buckybits that they are a low priority for a portable FFI.   At the
> same time, many implementations will have _some_ kinds of characters
> that aren't easilly converted to C values in a portable way -- so the
> possibility that asking for a character can return an error is worth
> building in to the portable FFI.
>
That also would solve the second feature macro I've in use so far:
SCM_FEATURE_CHAR_UNICODE. If it isn't defined, the implementation is
only guaranteed to support ASCII chars. I think the macros would come
handy in the scm/tests, however, that way the test cases can be shared
among all implementations.

Andy
-- 
Andreas Rottmann         | [email protected]      | 118634484@ICQ | [email protected]
http://yi.org/rotty      | GnuPG Key: http://yi.org/rotty/gpg.asc
Fingerprint              | DFB4 4EB4 78A4 5EEE 6219  F228 F92F CFC5 01FD 5B62

Python is executable pseudocode, Perl is executable line-noise.