From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Should catchlist elements be marked during GC? Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 23:41:30 +0200 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1152827017 5074 80.91.229.2 (13 Jul 2006 21:43:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 21:43:37 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jul 13 23:43:35 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G18y5-0001MY-Q9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 13 Jul 2006 23:43:34 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G18y5-0000lE-9x for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 13 Jul 2006 17:43:33 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1G18xs-0000j7-Ij for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Jul 2006 17:43:20 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1G18xr-0000hy-EI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Jul 2006 17:43:19 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G18xr-0000hm-9N for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Jul 2006 17:43:19 -0400 Original-Received: from [195.41.46.236] (helo=pfepb.post.tele.dk) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1G18zh-0002ZA-Qg for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Jul 2006 17:45:13 -0400 Original-Received: from kfs-l.imdomain.dk.cua.dk (0x503e2644.bynxx3.adsl-dhcp.tele.dk [80.62.38.68]) by pfepb.post.tele.dk (Postfix) with SMTP id 79145A50008; Thu, 13 Jul 2006 23:43:14 +0200 (CEST) Original-To: Stefan Monnier In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Thu, 13 Jul 2006 11:24:15 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:56983 Archived-At: Stefan Monnier writes: >> During GC, we don't explicitly go through the catchlist, marking the >> TAG and VAL member of each element. > > What makes you say so? Since struct catchtag is defined in eval.c, I didn't think alloc.c would know how to scan the catchlist, so I didn't even bother to check. > Actually, it is safe to assume so if we use conservative stack marking > because the catchlist elements are all allocated on the stack, so we > currently mark them redundantly. Ah, yes. -- Kim F. Storm http://www.cua.dk