Re: bug in simplify_shallow

["Ruud H.G. van Tol" <rvtol@isolution.nl>]

On 2023-09-29 23:05, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 27, 2023 at 05:01:07PM +0200, Ruud H.G. van Tol wrote:
> > On 2023-08-27 16:13, Karim Belabas wrote:
> > > [...] What Bill and I suggested was to return "a copy of the 
> > > inserted element"
> > > instead. I don't really see a scenario where this would break
> > > compatibility ... except this would make insertion about twice slower,
> > > even in cases where the returned value is ignored.
> > Yes, so I wondered if the "void calling context" is decidable at
> > compile-time, such that any new overhead can be avoided where feasible.
> Indeed there used to be a bug in the compiler that I just fixed
> that caused it to fail to take the void context into account in
> some case.

Thanks for the changes and fixes!

(also for not making it return the final length of the list ;) )

-- Ruud


P.S. In paridecl.h, comparing listpop:

 void    listpop(GEN L, long index);

shouldn't these now also be void?

 GEN     listinsert(GEN list, GEN object, long index);
 GEN     listput(GEN list, GEN object, long index);

(or does GEN cover that already?)