From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: Threads in emacs implementation
Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2005 08:02:22 -0400
Message-ID: <E1DfzGI-0006w7-Os@fencepost.gnu.org>
References: <6dbd4d0005060619227dd41364@mail.gmail.com>
	<b615b856977b7d588668b33aba8808df@raeburn.org>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org
X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1118233005 13332 80.91.229.2 (8 Jun 2005 12:16:45 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2005 12:16:45 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: dbueno@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jun 08 14:16:44 2005
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165])
	by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1DfzSR-0006rP-Rj
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 08 Jun 2005 14:14:56 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1DfzZ9-0007vP-UJ
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 08 Jun 2005 08:21:51 -0400
Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1DfzRQ-0003jf-CM
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jun 2005 08:13:52 -0400
Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1DfzRN-0003hE-C3
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jun 2005 08:13:49 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DfzP5-0002Sx-0s
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jun 2005 08:11:27 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DfzLW-0003vQ-C7
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jun 2005 08:07:46 -0400
Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34)
	id 1DfzGI-0006w7-Os; Wed, 08 Jun 2005 08:02:22 -0400
Original-To: Ken Raeburn <raeburn@raeburn.org>
In-reply-to: <b615b856977b7d588668b33aba8808df@raeburn.org> (message from Ken
	Raeburn on Tue, 7 Jun 2005 01:16:53 -0400)
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=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:38321
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:38321

      Garbage collection also gets more interesting when 
    multiple threads are manipulating Lisp objects at a time.

In Emacs, GC doesn't have to happen at any particular point.
It is done as a regular housekeeping task.
So it could work well enough to set a flag telling all threads to wait 
once they come to a suitable stopping point, and GC once all threads
get there.