> LilyPond exposes large parts of the internal implementation through
> the Scheme interface, and that has as a side-effect that there are
> many ways for users to break lilypond. This is unlikely to lead to
> arbitrary behavior, as Guile values themselves themselves are type
> tagged. The worst which can happen is that a value is incorrectly
> type-cast which leads to either a null dereference or some other
> type assertion.
Could you give a Scheme example for that, please?
> I don't think it is productive to try to systematically plug all
> these errors; at best, you'll replace a bunch of segmentation faults
> with just as unhelpful assertion failures.
I definitely prefer assertions to segfaults. But maybe that's only
me.
Werner
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
