Hi, Ken Raeburn <raeb...@raeburn.org> writes:
> I kind of assumed that making all-bits-zero an invalid value was a > conscious choice by the Guile (or SCM?) designers which wasn't likely > to be revisited. It is, after all, a fairly easy way of highlighting > a certain class of uninitialized-value problems -- choosing strict > checking and debugging over letting the programmer be lazy. Indeed, that could have been one reason. We could ask Aubrey Jaffer about this. > I think I'm mildly in favor of keeping all-bits-zero as an invalid > representation. But, if it's a huge win for BDW-GC, maybe it's worth > it. As discussed in my other message, it would actually be harmful. Thanks, Ludo'.
