From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?=) Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Merging =?utf-8?b?4oCYYmR3LWdjLXN0YXRpYy1hbGxvY+KAmQ==?= Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2009 11:15:17 +0200 Message-ID: <8763ay88d6.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1254475137 10836 80.91.229.12 (2 Oct 2009 09:18:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 09:18:57 +0000 (UTC) To: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Oct 02 11:18:50 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 1MteHY-0002la-Ni for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 02 Oct 2009 11:18:33 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45446 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MteHY-0007EP-2A for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 02 Oct 2009 05:18:32 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MteFE-0006g6-6C for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Oct 2009 05:16:08 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MteF9-0006eY-8X for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Oct 2009 05:16:07 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=50684 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MteF8-0006eS-JO for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Oct 2009 05:16:03 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:60659) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MteF8-0001Dx-AC for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Oct 2009 05:16:02 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1MteEr-0000xL-A3 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Oct 2009 11:15:45 +0200 Original-Received: from reverse-83.fdn.fr ([80.67.176.83]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 02 Oct 2009 11:15:45 +0200 Original-Received: from ludo by reverse-83.fdn.fr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 02 Oct 2009 11:15:45 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 31 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: reverse-83.fdn.fr X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 11 =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vend=E9miaire?= an 218 de la =?iso-8859-1?Q?R=E9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0xEA52ECF4 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 821D 815D 902A 7EAB 5CEE D120 7FBA 3D4F EB1F 5364 X-OS: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:AM9gsmJnckI00TljsNJvY1GTyII= X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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:9432 Archived-At: Hello! Following the inlining of stringbuf storage (ba54a2026beaadb4e7566d4b9e2c9e4c7cd793e6), the ‘bdw-gc-static-alloc' branch introduces a small source-level incompatibility. Namely, the following no longer works: const char foo[] = "foo"; SCM_SYMBOL (s_foo, foo); Because of the macrology that’s used to statically allocate stringbufs [0], the string has to be a literal: SCM_SYMBOL (s_foo, "foo"); The use of non-literal strings occurred only in ‘eval.c’ in Guile proper [1]. The question is: should we merge ‘bdw-gc-static-alloc’ despite this incompatibility (it can be argued that this won’t hurt many people and can be easily worked around)? If the answer is “no”, we still have the option of merging other aspects of the ‘bdw-gc-static-alloc’ branch, such as static allocation of subrs. What do you think? Thanks, Ludo’. [0] http://git.sv.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=guile.git;a=blobdiff;f=libguile/snarf.h;h=9eaccf60c14d825e657718e6f75257e293649f84;hp=c3113e1a7a977f95eb922e924855244dfe4d6cc2;hb=5f236208d0d864546e59afa0f5a11c9b3ba14b10;hpb=f0eb5ae6c173aed35965b0561897fda1d8ff0db1 [1] http://git.sv.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=guile.git;a=blobdiff;f=libguile/eval.c;h=e58c05410c2831d4061eb92b4ee2883c9203c919;hp=59db42976242e12fd41995e5e1fa5d169bd3b9bf;hb=5f236208d0d864546e59afa0f5a11c9b3ba14b10;hpb=d7e7a02a6251c8ed4f76933d9d30baeee3f599c0