From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: stefan Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel,gmane.network.serveez.devel Subject: Re: [dev-serveez] Re: memory management Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 21:47:07 +0100 (CET) Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <8765qgzc9p.fsf@zagadka.ping.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1048106838 23407 80.91.224.249 (19 Mar 2003 20:47:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 20:47:18 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 19 21:47:14 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18vkSv-00065B-00 for ; Wed, 19 Mar 2003 21:47:13 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 18vkSP-0004r3-0B for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Mar 2003 15:46:41 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 18vkS6-0004jA-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Mar 2003 15:46:22 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 18vkS3-0004Yj-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Mar 2003 15:46:20 -0500 Original-Received: from obh.snafu.de ([213.73.92.34]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.10.13) id 18vkS2-0004Gw-00; Wed, 19 Mar 2003 15:46:18 -0500 Original-Received: from p-164-186.zrz.tu-berlin.de ([130.149.164.186] helo=bono) by obh.snafu.de with asmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 3.36 #1) id 18vkRx-000KKu-00; Wed, 19 Mar 2003 21:46:13 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] ident=ela) by bono with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 18vkSq-0000Gw-00; Wed, 19 Mar 2003 21:47:08 +0100 X-X-Sender: stefan@bono.reversers.net Original-To: Marius Vollmer In-Reply-To: <8765qgzc9p.fsf@zagadka.ping.de> Original-cc: Serveez Developer Mailing List X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5 Precedence: list List-Id: Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:2095 gmane.network.serveez.devel:105 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:2095 On 18 Mar 2003, Marius Vollmer wrote: > > Would you supply a scm_free() inside libguile.dll there would be no > > problem, because then the free() called inside libguile.dll:scm_free() > > would match the previous malloc() (also called inside libguile.dll). > > If you can instruct code to use libguile.dll:scm_free instead of > kernel32.dll:free, can't you also instruct it to use msvcrt.dll:free > instead of kernel32.dll:free? I would need to call libguile.dll:libc:free. I would need to know to which libc libguile.dll was linked. BTW: The standard libc for MinGW is 'msvcrt.dll'. You get into trouble when you want to use another (native) compiler, like BorlandC or VisualC. So what would be the correct solution without scm_free()? Thanks in advance, stefan@lkcc.org _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel