Hello, Andy Wingo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There could be two fixes. One would be to assume that the Scheme code > that calls %fast-slot-ref et al is well-formed, and thus we need no > bounds checking. It's all in goops.scm, so this would be a decent > assumption. The other would be to use a different definition of > SCM_NUMBER_OF SLOTS, which would probably have a different purpose: > > #define SCM_NUMBER_OF_FIELDS(x) (SCM_STRUCT_VTABLE (x)[scm_si_nfields]) I'm not sure I understand all the details right now, but I would welcome patches. :-) That said, AFAIK, primitives always do as much run-time checking as needed, making no assumption about the correctness of Scheme code. I think it would be nice to follow that philosophy, unless it yields a performance hit. Thanks, Ludo'.
