Re: What's the deal with the module system?

[Neil Puttock]

2009/11/24 David Kastrup <address@hidden>:

> After applying <URL:http://codereview.appspot.com/160048> first,
> indeed the following diff that throws out all the toplevel scoping
> constructs and separate definitions of define-markup-command and
> define-markup-list-command passes the regressions tests.  Furthermore,
> tests show that the namespace of markups defined in one input file does
> not extend into the next input file.

As far as I can see, all you've done is effectively revert Nicolas's
code which fixed the memory leaks, so I can't see why it would work.

I've just applied your patch, and as expected, I get the following
errors with nearly every file (using a binary compiled with
--disable-optimising):

programming error: Parsed object should be dead: static
scm_unused_struct* Prob::mark_smob(scm_unused_struct*)
continuing, cross fingers
programming error: Parsed object should be dead: static
scm_unused_struct* Context_def::mark_smob(scm_unused_struct*)
continuing, cross fingers

Furthermore, make check segfaults if I use -j2.

Regards,
Neil