From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Han-Wen Nienhuys Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: module GC bug Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2005 20:50:28 +0200 Message-ID: <42DAA874.4020900@xs4all.nl> References: <42A8D188.20007@xs4all.nl> <87fyuq1mrr.fsf@zagadka.de> <42CEF39F.2040608@xs4all.nl> <87irzeh122.fsf@zagadka.de> <42D59370.7080802@xs4all.nl> <877jfqh93q.fsf@zagadka.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1121626428 22665 80.91.229.2 (17 Jul 2005 18:53:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2005 18:53:48 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Jul 17 20:53:46 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DuEGa-0004Wd-Px for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 17 Jul 2005 20:53:33 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DuEIS-0001zX-Ur for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 17 Jul 2005 14:55:30 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DuEHI-0001ky-A5 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 17 Jul 2005 14:54:17 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DuEH9-0001gZ-P2 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 17 Jul 2005 14:54:09 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DuEH9-0001fy-ML for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 17 Jul 2005 14:54:07 -0400 Original-Received: from [194.109.24.33] (helo=smtp-vbr13.xs4all.nl) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DuEMS-0003Ij-CP for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 17 Jul 2005 14:59:36 -0400 Original-Received: from [192.168.123.107] (muurbloem.xs4all.nl [213.84.26.127]) by smtp-vbr13.xs4all.nl (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j6HIoS1a078505; Sun, 17 Jul 2005 20:50:29 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from hanwen@xs4all.nl) User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2-6 (X11/20050513) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en Original-To: Marius Vollmer In-Reply-To: <877jfqh93q.fsf@zagadka.de> X-Virus-Scanned: by XS4ALL Virus Scanner 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:5165 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:5165 Marius Vollmer wrote: > Han-Wen Nienhuys writes: > > >>what happens if the weak (c[ad]r ITEM) is marked through a postponed >>weak vector that you haven't processed yet? Then P is removed >>erroneously, or am I missing something? > > > Hmm, you are right. I first have thought about this behavior as a > feature, but I now see that it is in fact not wanted. The order the > weak vectors are processed in affects the result, which is not good, > obviously. > > Right now, I hope to get around this by repeatedly scanning all weak > vectors until no new markings have taken place, and only then remove > the unmarked items. Hi; isn't it possible to store the 'module property in a doubly weak hash table? What you propose sounds very costly , and my gut instinct says that I can punch a hole in it as well. > > Thanks for pointing this out! > -- Han-Wen Nienhuys - hanwen@xs4all.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel