Re: GC + Java finalization

[Mike Gran <spk121@yahoo.com>]

On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 11:14:16AM +0100, Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
> 
> Jonas Hahnfeld via "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" <guile-devel@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > [[PGP Signed Part:Good signature from 91C9C33D2C61ACDB Jonas Hahnfeld <jonas.hahnfeld@gmail.com> (trust undefined) created at 2021-11-19T13:18:31+0100 using RSA]]
> > Am Sonntag, dem 10.10.2021 um 18:22 +0200 schrieb Jonas Hahnfeld via
> > Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library:
> >> Am Donnerstag, dem 15.07.2021 um 20:44 +0200 schrieb Jonas Hahnfeld via
> >> Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library:
> >> > Am Samstag, dem 03.07.2021 um 14:05 +0200 schrieb Jonas Hahnfeld via
> >> > Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library:
> >> > > Hi Guile devs,
> >> > > 
> >> > > I'm hacking on GNU LilyPond and recently wondered if Guile could run
> >> > > without Java finalization that prevents collection of chains of
> >> > > unreachable objects. I found that the functionality is only needed once
> >> > > the first guardian is created, so it's possible to delay enabling the
> >> > > mode until then. This required some fixes to free functions that
> >> > > assumed dependent objects to be freed only later (see first two
> >> > > patches).
> >> > > The third patch delays ensuring Java finalization to scm_make_guardian,
> >> > > but doesn't disable it explicitly (it's on by default in bdwgc). This
> >> > > could now be done right after GC_INIT(), but it's not clear (at least
> >> > > to me) whether client applications actually rely it, so I think it's
> >> > > better if that's not done in Guile itself.
> >> > > 
> >> > > Please consider applying, the fixes potentially also to stable-2.2.
> >> > 
> >> > I didn't receive other comments than those by Maxime, so here is an
> >> > updated version of the first patch.
> >> 
> >> Ping, is there anybody looking at patches sent to the mailing list?
> >
> > Last ping before I give up...
> 
> Did someone now look into the patches?

Arne,

It is likely that a few people saw the patches, but, no one person
with commit access felt like he or she should be the person to fix it
or champion it.

The maintainers have always seemed amenable to allowing the committers
to fix things without a lot of process, but, Guile as a project
is not structured to encourage committers to look through the patch
and bug backlog.

I've seen some e-mail traffic about how to fix it, but, I don't think
a consensus had been reached.

(I say this as a bystander and former committer; I don't speak for
the project.)

-Mike
> 
> Best wishes,
> Arne
> -- 
> Unpolitisch sein
> hei�t politisch sein,
> ohne es zu merken.
> draketo.de