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: Re: Cleanup mark-during-GC debug checks. Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 09:36:40 +0200 Message-ID: <87myiglaev.fsf@gnu.org> References: <00163630f0ef5b47e60456777f02@google.com> <87sks9i5ow.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1221032425 1476 80.91.229.12 (10 Sep 2008 07:40:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 07:40:25 +0000 (UTC) To: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Sep 10 09:41:20 2008 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 1KdKKF-0000Vn-57 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Sep 2008 09:41:19 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34639 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KdKJF-0007Qw-5p for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Sep 2008 03:40:17 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KdKJ4-0007JK-GP for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Sep 2008 03:40:06 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KdKJ2-0007Go-Kh for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Sep 2008 03:40:05 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=36222 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KdKJ2-0007GU-Dz for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Sep 2008 03:40:04 -0400 Original-Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]:41248) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KdKJ2-0001iP-0I for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Sep 2008 03:40:04 -0400 Original-Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KdKJ1-0005oH-BV for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Sep 2008 03:40:03 -0400 Original-Received: from root by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1KdKJ0-00056J-P2 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Sep 2008 07:40:02 +0000 Original-Received: from 193.50.110.60 ([193.50.110.60]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 10 Sep 2008 07:40:02 +0000 Original-Received: from ludo by 193.50.110.60 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 10 Sep 2008 07:40:02 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 35 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 193.50.110.60 X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 25 Fructidor an 216 de la =?iso-8859-1?Q?R=E9volutio?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?n?= 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: i686-pc-linux-gnu User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.3 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:gjQuBhHkufm+9z1QRq6B03TUl/Y= X-detected-kernel: by mx20.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:7659 Archived-At: Hi, Han-Wen Nienhuys writes: > Ludovic Courtès escreveu: >> 1. I don't want to use a web interface to review code. Most free >> software projects use email in one form or another, which I find >> convenient. Having patches in-lined is optimal IMO. > > My experience is that a web interface (which tracks different versions of > the same patch) is a lot easier when it is a major change with lots of > revisions. It's really a matter of taste. I prefer email and/or topic branch in Git. >> * I'd name the macro `SCM_DEBUG_MARK_PHASE' rather, as it sounds mot >> idiomatic (but I'm not a native speaker). > > It's rather the reverse: ensuring that the non-mark phase is correct (in > not having mark calls), but I couldn't think of a good name. My comment was about "marking phase" vs. "mark phase". >> * Use "static const char msg[] = ...". > > done. OK, feel free to push! Hope we'll keep compiling with `SCM_DEBUG_MARK_PHASE == 1'! :-) Thanks, Ludo'.