Re: request reversion regarding scm_i_* removal

[ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)]

Hi!

Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com> writes:

> Guile-gnome does, when registering a new port type, for gnome-vfs. The
> port API isn't threadsafe, and also sucks as I mentioned ;) From
> gnome-vfs/gnome/gw/gnome-vfs-port.c:
>
> #define LOCK scm_i_pthread_mutex_lock (&scm_i_port_table_mutex)
> #define UNLOCK scm_i_pthread_mutex_unlock (&scm_i_port_table_mutex)

Then would it be sufficient for Guile-GNOME if `scm_i_port_table_mutex'
and `scm_i_symbol_length ()' were kept public?

> Also there's the bit in the flush() vfunc about scm_i_terminating.

Normally, `really_cleanup_for_exit ()' calls `scm_flush_all_ports ()'
upon exit.  A quick test through GDB shows that `scm_i_terminating',
whose sole purpose is to indicate fport code that exception handling
cannot be used, is always zero.  Did you encounter situations where it
was needed?

Thanks,
Ludo'.