On Thu, 2008-07-17 at 19:09 +0000, Eric Rannaud wrote: > BTW, does BitC have any concept of 'volatile'?
Not at the moment, and that is something that needs to be addressed. Volatile is a very strange semantic beastie, but it's otherwise just a type qualifier. > > The problem I see with doing this sort of thing in the macro system is > > that you lose the checking advantages that you can obtain if you keep > > this sort of thing type-able. > > The best of both worlds would be to somehow give macros the ability to > validate their arguments in a more abstract way than going through the > AST by hand. So now you want the macro transformer to be able to invoke the type checker in context, and perhaps also the unifier. And I think I agree, but surely you see that the complexity of the compiler needed to support this type of macro preprocessor is rapidly expanding... shap _______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
