Re: scratch/igc e30aacad558: Convert SPLAT_PVEC to a function, restore an exhaustive switch

Re: scratch/igc e30aacad558: Convert SPLAT_PVEC to a function, restore an exhaustive switch

[Pip Cet]

On Saturday, July 20th, 2024 at 07:39, Gerd Moellmann <gerd@gnu.org> wrote:
> branch: scratch/igc
> commit e30aacad5582889cb18b5089e73d022f0c8ae7c8
> Author: Gerd Möllmann gerd@gnu.org
> 
> Commit: Gerd Möllmann gerd@gnu.org
> 
> Convert SPLAT_PVEC to a function, restore an exhaustive switch

> +#ifndef IN_MY_FORK
> + case PVEC_OBARRAY:
> +#endif
> + case PVEC_HASH_TABLE:
> + case PVEC_WEAK_HASH_TABLE:
> + case PVEC_SYMBOL_WITH_POS:
> + case PVEC_PROCESS:
> + case PVEC_RECORD:
> + case PVEC_CLOSURE:
> + case PVEC_SQLITE:
> + case PVEC_TS_NODE:
> + case PVEC_NORMAL_VECTOR:
> +#ifdef IN_MY_FORK
> + case PVEC_PACKAGE:
> +#endif
> + case PVEC_WINDOW_CONFIGURATION:
> + case PVEC_BUFFER:
> + case PVEC_FRAME:
> + case PVEC_WINDOW:
> + case PVEC_CHAR_TABLE:
> + case PVEC_SUB_CHAR_TABLE:
> + case PVEC_BOOL_VECTOR:
> + case PVEC_OVERLAY:
> + case PVEC_OTHER:
> + case PVEC_MISC_PTR:
> + case PVEC_XWIDGET:
> + case PVEC_XWIDGET_VIEW:
> + case PVEC_TERMINAL:
> + case PVEC_MARKER:
> + case PVEC_MODULE_GLOBAL_REFERENCE:
> + igc_assert (!"finalization not implemented");
> + break;

Hmm. I'm afraid my changes mean finalize_vector is called for all vectors with an extended header, so it must be a nop rather than aborting. Is it okay if I change that? I'll keep the exhaustive switch, of course :-)

Pip

Re: scratch/igc e30aacad558: Convert SPLAT_PVEC to a function, restore an exhaustive switch

[Gerd Möllmann]

Pip Cet <pipcet@protonmail.com> writes:

> Hmm. I'm afraid my changes mean finalize_vector is called for all
> vectors with an extended header, so it must be a nop rather than
> aborting. Is it okay if I change that? I'll keep the exhaustive
> switch, of course :-)

 Sorry for that, of course :-)