Hi, On Mon 07 Dec 2009 18:09, [email protected] (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> "Andy Wingo" <[email protected]> writes: > >> commit 9ea31741dad29ae123e468a203b72df6d190f6e1 > > I’ve always thought that smobs-as-structs would be a good thing, not > only to reduce code size and simplify procedure dispatch, but also to > remove arbitrary limits like on the number of smob types. Yes, all this is possible. However I ran into some snags, and I wanted to wait until we had bytecode trampolines for subrs as Bruno Haible suggested before proceding further. > Ludo’, amazed by the pace at which things have been falling into place > over the last couple of weeks! I just had a lot of branches that needed eval.scm to work :) Cheers, Andy -- http://wingolog.org/
