Re: docstrings in Guile!

["Greg J. Badros" <gjb at cs dot washington dot edu>]

Eric Moore <moore@chem.cmu.edu> writes:

> >>>>> "Greg" == Greg J Badros <gjb@cs.washington.edu> writes:
> 
> Greg> Daniel Skarda <0rfelyus@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> writes:
> Greg> But that's the point: you don't *have* to rewrite all existing
> Greg> code; it's just a performance optimization to rewrite the
> Greg> existing code, along with a simplification of that code. 
> 
> Not even much of a performance optimization:

<snip>

> The optimizer optimizes the extra test out anyway :)

Stellar!  I was planning on doing this test myself and am thrilled you
beat me to it.  I didn't want to overstep my claims before checking, but 
this is great news.

I will make this change to the macros and drop the SCM_NIMP tests.  I
don't even think there is good cause to define the SCM_SLOPPY_FOOP
tests, but I will if I hear a lot of clamouring supported by evidence.

Thanks, Eric!

Greg