[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: removing scm_gc_mark_conservatively()
From: |
Marius Vollmer |
Subject: |
Re: removing scm_gc_mark_conservatively() |
Date: |
25 Sep 2001 23:01:14 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.0.102 |
Dirk Herrmann <address@hidden> writes:
> On 22 Sep 2001, Marius Vollmer wrote:
>
> > [...]
> > I'm not sure whether we have such code, but we might.
>
> [...] In the above code, the correct solution would be to use
> scm_remember_upto_here_1(x) after the call to the gc.
Yes, the code that I've shown is broken and needs to be fixed,
ultimately. I was talking about our current situation, were
conservative scanning of `free' cells is no longer done, but the
broken code has not been fixed.
Are you sure that no such broken use of SCM_NEWCELL exists in Guile
and in user code? If that would be so, great!
As the real solution, I have proposed removing SCM_NEWCELL completely,
and only provide means (a function or a macro) for simultaneously
allocating and initializing a new cell. In the deprecation period,
SCM_NEWCELL would be made safe by having it set the type slot to
scm_tc16_allocated. Please see the "Let's throw out SCM_NEWCELL"
thread.
- removing scm_gc_mark_conservatively(), Chris Cramer, 2001/09/16
- Re: removing scm_gc_mark_conservatively(), Dirk Herrmann, 2001/09/17
- Re: removing scm_gc_mark_conservatively(), Marius Vollmer, 2001/09/22
- Re: removing scm_gc_mark_conservatively(), Dirk Herrmann, 2001/09/24
- Re: removing scm_gc_mark_conservatively(),
Marius Vollmer <=
- Re: removing scm_gc_mark_conservatively(), Dirk Herrmann, 2001/09/25
- Re: removing scm_gc_mark_conservatively(), Marius Vollmer, 2001/09/26
- Re: removing scm_gc_mark_conservatively(), Dirk Herrmann, 2001/09/27
- Re: removing scm_gc_mark_conservatively(), Dirk Herrmann, 2001/09/27
- Re: removing scm_gc_mark_conservatively(), Marius Vollmer, 2001/09/27
- Re: removing scm_gc_mark_conservatively(), Marius Vollmer, 2001/09/27