tcl-core

[TCLCORE] CFV TIP #340

[Jan N. <nij...@us...>]

This is a Call For Votes on TIP #340.

 TIP #340: CONST Qualification of Tcl_SetResult's argument and -Wwrite-strings

Please send your votes to the tcl-core mailing list by
Monday dec 1st, 12:00 GMT (i.e. [clock format 1228132800]).
My vote follows:

 TIP #340: YES

Regards,
       Jan Nijtmans

Re: [TCLCORE] CFV TIP #340

[Joe E. <jen...@fl...>]

Jan Nijtmans wrote:
> This is a Call For Votes on TIP #340.
>
>  TIP #340: CONST Qualification of Tcl_SetResult's argument and -Wwrite-string

TIP#340: NO.

I support the goals of this TIP, but not the specific
proposed refactoring.  It leaves Tcl_SetResult() in a
broken state: with an incorrect const qualifier on the
second argument and a worthless vestigial third argument.

What is called for is a new, two-argument, const-correct
entry point:

    void Tcl_SetResultString(Tcl_Interp *, const char *);

and for Tcl_SetResult() to be deprecated in its entirety.
(Or not.  Keeping it around is cheap.)


--Joe English

  jen...@fl...

Re: [TCLCORE] CFV TIP #340

[Jan N. <jan...@gm...>]

2008/11/23 Joe English <jen...@fl...>:
> Jan Nijtmans wrote:
>> This is a Call For Votes on TIP #340.
>>
>>  TIP #340: CONST Qualification of Tcl_SetResult's argument and -Wwrite-string
>
> TIP#340: NO.

Information for other voters: I'm currently working this out with Joe. The
way I'm planning to resolve that is clearifying the documentation such
that Tcl_SetObjResult is always prefered above Tcl_SetResult. But the
fact that Tcl_SetResult() is now for 95% incorrect and this TIP reverses
that, I don't think that modifying the reference implementation - apart
from the wordings in the documentation- helps to resolve this.

Regards,
        Jan Nijtmans

Re: [TCLCORE] CFV TIP #340

[Donal K. F. <don...@ma...>]

Jan Nijtmans wrote:
> 2008/11/23 Joe English <jen...@fl...>:
>> Jan Nijtmans wrote:
>>> This is a Call For Votes on TIP #340.
>>>
>>>  TIP #340: CONST Qualification of Tcl_SetResult's argument and -Wwrite-string
>> TIP#340: NO.
> 
> Information for other voters: I'm currently working this out with Joe. The
> way I'm planning to resolve that is clearifying the documentation such
> that Tcl_SetObjResult is always prefered above Tcl_SetResult. But the
> fact that Tcl_SetResult() is now for 95% incorrect and this TIP reverses
> that, I don't think that modifying the reference implementation - apart
> from the wordings in the documentation- helps to resolve this.

So are you really running a vote on this? I ask because I'd like to know
whether to mark the TIP as being voted upon...

Donal.

Re: [TCLCORE] CFV TIP #340

[Joe E. <jen...@fl...>]

Jan Nijtmans wrote:
> 2008/11/23 Joe English <jen...@fl...>:
> > TIP#340: NO.
> >
> > I support the goals of this TIP, but not the specific
> > proposed refactoring.  It leaves Tcl_SetResult() in a
> > broken state: with an incorrect const qualifier on the
> > second argument and a worthless vestigial third argument.
> >
> > What is called for is a new, two-argument, const-correct
> > entry point:
> >
> >    void Tcl_SetResultString(Tcl_Interp *, const char *);
>
> Does this mean that adding such a function would
> change your vote to a YES?  Does your NO mean
> that this TIP doesn't go far enough?

Yes on both counts.

> For the record, I think as well that Tcl_SetResult
> should be deprecated, but I didn't want to go
> that far in this TIP because it means a lot of work,
> changing all the calls in Tcl and Tk.


--Joe English

  jen...@fl...

Re: [TCLCORE] CFV TIP #340

[Donald G P. <dg...@ni...>]

Joe English wrote:
>>> What is called for is a new, two-argument, const-correct
>>> entry point:
>>>
>>>    void Tcl_SetResultString(Tcl_Interp *, const char *);

Call it Tcl_SetStringResult() for parallel with Tcl_SetObjResult().

-- 
| Don Porter          Mathematical and Computational Sciences Division |
| don...@ni...             Information Technology Laboratory |
| http://math.nist.gov/~DPorter/                                  NIST |
|______________________________________________________________________|