From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel,gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: Killing off scm_init_guile for Guile 2.0 ? Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 16:32:14 -0500 Message-ID: <20090116213215.YITDV.179685.root@cdptpa-web09-z02> References: <49dd78620901151530o66a2641ax47e526d15fc09faf@mail.gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1232142025 23011 80.91.229.12 (16 Jan 2009 21:40:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 21:40:25 +0000 (UTC) To: guile-devel , Guile User , Neil Jerram Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jan 16 22:41:37 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LNwRU-0001S7-R4 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 22:41:29 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52547 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LNwQD-0004oX-Hc for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 16:40:10 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LNwIg-0007KY-4g for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 16:32:22 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LNwId-0007In-VS for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 16:32:21 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=32997 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LNwId-0007IU-L6; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 16:32:19 -0500 Original-Received: from cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([75.180.132.122]:38488) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LNwId-0007sK-8J; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 16:32:19 -0500 Original-Received: from cdptpa-web09-z02 ([10.127.132.160]) by cdptpa-smta01.mail.rr.com with ESMTP id <20090116213215.QKQU18747.cdptpa-smta01.mail.rr.com@cdptpa-web09-z02>; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 21:32:15 +0000 In-Reply-To: <49dd78620901151530o66a2641ax47e526d15fc09faf@mail.gmail.com> X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Sensitivity: Normal X-Originating-IP: X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (1203?) X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:8044 gmane.lisp.guile.user:7064 Archived-At: ---- Neil Jerram wrote: > scm_init_guile has always been a bit problematic, as it requires lots > of heuristic and OS-dependent code to try to determine where the base > of the stack is. It's never been formally deprecated, but we have > always advised people to use scm_boot_guile or scm_with_guile if they > can, and the manual says: > > The function `scm_init_guile' might not be available on all > platforms since it requires some stack-bounds-finding magic that > might not have been ported to all platforms that Guile runs on. > Thus, if you can, it is better to use `scm_with_guile' or its > variation `scm_boot_guile' instead of this function. [ ... ] > Thoughts? On the other hand, does moving to BDW-GC take a lot of this > out of our hands anyway? In any case, it would be interesting to hear > whether people think that scm_init_guile is really needed. Iirc, scm_init_guile is mainly used when you do not have access to main(), for example writing a module for apache. Generally, when you want to add Guile to an already existing application that has plugins or extension modules via .so's. -Dale