From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.bugs Subject: bug#14792: Actually, this discussion is moot Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 23:19:53 +0200 Message-ID: <87k3kbbszq.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <87ehbedwxt.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1374960070 15796 80.91.229.3 (27 Jul 2013 21:21:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 21:21:10 +0000 (UTC) To: 14792@debbugs.gnu.org Original-X-From: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jul 27 23:21:08 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-bugs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1V3BvH-00022A-90 for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 23:21:07 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55542 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V3BvG-0004DU-RX for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 17:21:06 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42516) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V3BvD-0004DP-WD for bug-guile@gnu.org; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 17:21:05 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V3BvD-0001jG-1l for bug-guile@gnu.org; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 17:21:03 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:59028) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V3BvC-0001j4-UI for bug-guile@gnu.org; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 17:21:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V3BvC-0000qb-8q for bug-guile@gnu.org; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 17:21:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org In-Reply-To: <87ehbedwxt.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> Resent-From: David Kastrup Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guile@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 21:21:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 14792 X-GNU-PR-Package: guile X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 14792-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B14792.13749600103144 (code B ref 14792); Sat, 27 Jul 2013 21:21:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 14792) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Jul 2013 21:20:10 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53342 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V3BuL-0000oe-9M for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 17:20:09 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([208.118.235.10]:46366 ident=Debian-exim) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V3BuG-0000oM-NY for 14792@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 17:20:05 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53673 helo=lola) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V3BuG-0000UA-4d for 14792@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 17:20:04 -0400 Original-Received: by lola (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E3886EAC2A; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 23:19:53 +0200 (CEST) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-guile@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GUILE, GNU's Ubiquitous Extension Language" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.bugs:7245 Archived-At: Object properties are implemented via key-weak hash tables and those only support eq? as hash equality in a reliable way. I actually can't determine how key-weak hash tables would deal with immediate Scheme values: will they never get released, or will they get released immediately? >From reading the documentation, I'd lean towards guessing the latter (as for immediate Scheme values, there _never_ is a remaining reference). That would likely make for some surprises to people, while the other option would be good for memory leaks. Either way, numbers seem like a bad idea for use in key-weak hash tables. -- David Kastrup