On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 09:50:31PM +0100, Jörg F. Wittenberger wrote: > To be consistent with the handling of other distinguished objects like > "()" (expressed as "null") and the eof-of-file-object (likewise "eof") > it would be great, if we had "true" and "false" to restrict these > beyond the rather generic "boolean" in those cases.
I ran into this one as well, in the case where declarations for pointer types confuse the scrutinizer. There's a ticket for it: https://bugs.call-cc.org/ticket/847 > Feasible? Unsure. I hope so! Cheers, Peter -- http://www.more-magic.net _______________________________________________ Chicken-hackers mailing list Chicken-hackers@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers
