From: Marius Vollmer <mvo@zagadka.de>
Cc: djurfeldt@nada.kth.se, guile-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: SCM_DEFER_INTS versus error
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 20:01:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87smmod7o7.fsf@zagadka.ping.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200309192034.NAA04855@morrowfield.regexps.com> (Tom Lord's message of "Fri, 19 Sep 2003 13:34:34 -0700 (PDT)")
Tom Lord <lord@emf.net> writes:
> > From: Marius Vollmer <mvo@zagadka.de>
>
> Have things _really_ diverged so far that the following no longer
> applies?
Yes, I would say so.
> > The whole DEFER/ALLOW business is anachronistic (in my view at least)
> > and should go away. Originally, it was used to mark sections of code
> > that could not tolerate being interrupted, at a time when POSIX
> > signals could run Scheme code right from the signal handler and that
> > Scheme code could invoke continuations or throw to a catch.
>
> More specifically, they marked segments of code during which the heap
> and flow-control could be in an inconsistent state as far as the usual
> macros, gc, etc. were concerned. That's an "extended" notion of
> "inconsitent state" -- it included data structures and system state
> that most of scheme didn't care about at all but that had to be
> correlated with scheme heap state and flow of control.
Yes, your are right of course. Not only interrupts could mess things
up, but they were the only asynchronous source of lossage. The only
other source would be a programming error, right?
> (Have you dropped the SCM_INTS_{ENABLED,DISABLED,INDIFFERENT} decls?!?)
I didn't even know they were there, at some time! So, yes, they are
gone, too.
> Traditionally, as an example, between DEFER/ALLOW, the
> pointer-to-malloced-data in an object such as string was not required
> to be valid. Consequently, GC had to be excluded between
> DEFER/ALLOW.
We now do this with careful coding only. Still having the DEFER/ALLOW
markups in the code is helpful for statically checking this, as you
say. Hmm...
--
GPG: D5D4E405 - 2F9B BCCC 8527 692A 04E3 331E FAF8 226A D5D4 E405
_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-09-22 18:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-08-05 1:37 SCM_DEFER_INTS versus error Kevin Ryde
2003-09-17 22:58 ` Marius Vollmer
2003-09-19 20:34 ` Tom Lord
2003-09-22 18:01 ` Marius Vollmer [this message]
2003-09-20 23:44 ` Kevin Ryde
2003-09-22 18:10 ` Marius Vollmer
2003-09-23 1:01 ` Mikael Djurfeldt
2003-10-07 17:54 ` Marius Vollmer
2003-12-06 21:15 ` Kevin Ryde
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87smmod7o7.fsf@zagadka.ping.de \
--to=mvo@zagadka.de \
--cc=djurfeldt@nada.kth.se \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).