GNU bug report logs - #17474
Making *unspecified* equivalent to (values) would seem convenient

Previous Next

Full log

Message #49 received at 17474 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Mark H Weaver <mhw <at> netris.org>
To: David Kastrup <dak <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 17474 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#17474: Ping?
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 18:00:47 -0400

David Kastrup <dak <at> gnu.org> writes:
> So you think that it will be more "lightweight" if (values) does not
> have an immediate representation but rather creates a multiple-values
> object on the heap?

I don't have time to continue this discussion, but I wanted to respond
to this one point: there should be a single global statically-allocated
instance of the multiple-values object containing zero values, and the
procedures that create multiple-values objects would always use that
one.

      Mark

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.