From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dirk Herrmann Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: gen gc Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 18:00:59 +0200 (CEST) Sender: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <15669.63974.973133.308661@blauw.xs4all.nl> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1027008149 29673 127.0.0.1 (18 Jul 2002 16:02:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 16:02:29 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Marius Vollmer , guile-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 17VDjY-0007iT-00 for ; Thu, 18 Jul 2002 18:02:28 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17VDjK-00020W-00; Thu, 18 Jul 2002 12:02:14 -0400 Original-Received: from sallust.ida.ing.tu-bs.de ([134.169.132.52]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17VDiC-0001zO-00 for ; Thu, 18 Jul 2002 12:01:04 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost (dirk@localhost) by sallust.ida.ing.tu-bs.de (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA02508; Thu, 18 Jul 2002 18:00:59 +0200 (CEST) Original-To: Han-Wen In-Reply-To: <15669.63974.973133.308661@blauw.xs4all.nl> Errors-To: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:822 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:822 On Thu, 18 Jul 2002, Han-Wen wrote: > mvo@zagadka.ping.de writes: > > Han-Wen writes: > > > > > How is this supposed to portable to GenGC? > > > > > > SCM_DEFINE (scm_object_address, "object-address", 1, 0, 0, > > > (SCM obj), > > > "Return an integer that for the lifetime of @var{obj} is uniquely\n" > > > "returned by this function for @var{obj}") > > > > > > This is used in some of the goops code -- should I retain it? > > > > It would be cool if you could fake it. It doesn't need to be the real > > memory address of the object, just a unique integer. > > ? > > What if I can't? Memory cells are going to move around. I don't see a > way to generate a unique number without making some kind of table for > objects subjected to object-address. > > Btw, I can imagine that internal hash tables might use the address of > a cell as a source for a hash index. Does that happen anywhere? Look into hash.[ch]. scm_hashq seems to be what you think of. Best regards, Dirk Herrmann _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel