Re: ptob object scm_t_bits vs long

2006-05-30 Thread Kevin Ryde
Marius Vollmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > If you are motivated, you might think about cleaning up and > documenting the ports API... but on the other hand, that should maybe > wait until we have Unicode support sorted out. The thing I couldn't tell for now was how to instantiate a port type o

Re: ptob object scm_t_bits vs long

2006-05-29 Thread Marius Vollmer
Kevin Ryde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > scm_make_port_type returns scm_t_bits, but the various setting > functions like scm_set_port_mark take a long. Should they be > scm_t_bits too? Yes. Good catch. If you are motivated, you might think about cleaning up and documenting the ports API... but

ptob object scm_t_bits vs long

2006-04-14 Thread Kevin Ryde
scm_make_port_type returns scm_t_bits, but the various setting functions like scm_set_port_mark take a long. Should they be scm_t_bits too? ___ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel