From: Donal K. F. <don...@ma...> - 2013-02-28 10:17:33
|
Some nitpicking below... On 28/02/2013 09:59, Jan Nijtmans wrote: > - Tcl_PkgPresent up to Tcl_UpVar are just thin wrappers > around Tcl_PkgPresent2 up to Tcl_UpVar2. I see no > caveats using macro's here at all. Though there is the question of what the API *should* be. > - The Tcl_Eval, Tcl_GlobalEval, Tcl_SaveResult, > Tcl_RestoreResult and Tcl_DiscardResult do the > same as their function counterpart, except that > interp->result is not saved/restored. For extensions > which don't access interp->result that's OK, but > who knows there still are... Therefore I would put > an ifdef TCL_NO_DEPRECATED around it. Scrubbing interp->result would be a wonderful thing to do in 9.0. If we can't get rid of things that turned out to be not a great idea at a .0 release, when can we ditch them? Tk certainly shouldn't be using this, and shouldn't have been for years (i.e., if it did, that was UGLY). > - The Tcl_AddErrorInfo/Tcl_AddObjErrorInfo macro's > are somewhat less efficient as their functions > counterparts. They are only used in the error case, > so I would say "who cares!". But still, better be > careful. We're optimizing the error case now? I've been going in the opposite direction in 8.6, trying to make the errors more descriptive (to computers, not to people where we're pretty good already). Donal. |