Changes between Initial Version and Version 1 of Ticket #1620


Ignore:
Timestamp:
05/29/19 16:45:54 (17 months ago)
Author:
sjamaan
Comment:

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • Ticket #1620 – Description

    initial v1  
    2929}}}
    3030
    31 The reason is that in the first case, the `eq?` calls get replaced by `(##core#inline "eqp" a b)` while in the second case, the `=` calls get replaced by `(let ((x a) (y b)) (##core_inline "C_eqp" x y))` and the `let` is not considered `replacable` even though (I think?) it should be.
     31The reason is that in the first case, the `eq?` calls get replaced by `(##core#inline "C_eqp" a b)` while in the second case, the `=` calls get replaced by `(let ((x a) (y b)) (##core_inline "C_eqp" x y))` and the `let` is not considered `replacable` even though (I think?) it should be.
    3232
    3333That's because `fib`'s arguments are marked by `analyze-expression` in `core.scm` as `captured`.