From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Han-Wen Nienhuys Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: freeing srcprops ? Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 01:22:09 +0100 Message-ID: Reply-To: hanwen@xs4all.nl NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1168993356 9245 80.91.229.12 (17 Jan 2007 00:22:36 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 00:22:36 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 17 01:22:34 2007 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 1H6yZU-0002vK-1V for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 17 Jan 2007 01:22:32 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H6yZT-0007F4-TX for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 16 Jan 2007 19:22:31 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1H6yZP-0007Ep-8B for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Jan 2007 19:22:27 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1H6yZN-0007ER-Ps for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Jan 2007 19:22:26 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H6yZN-0007EM-GA for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Jan 2007 19:22:25 -0500 Original-Received: from [80.91.229.2] (helo=ciao.gmane.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1H6yZN-0005wx-11 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Jan 2007 19:22:25 -0500 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1H6yZE-0003mH-Pn for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Jan 2007 01:22:16 +0100 Original-Received: from muurbloem.xs4all.nl ([213.84.26.127]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 17 Jan 2007 01:22:16 +0100 Original-Received: from hanwen by muurbloem.xs4all.nl with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 17 Jan 2007 01:22:16 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-To: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-Lines: 24 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: muurbloem.xs4all.nl User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20061219) 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:6433 Archived-At: Hello, I'm doign some leak checking to see why LilyPond needs such obscene amounts of memory. Looking through the valgrind leak table, I see mention of srcprops. In srcprop.c, I see: static size_t srcprops_free (SCM obj) { *((scm_t_srcprops **) SCM_SMOB_DATA (obj)) = srcprops_freelist; srcprops_freelist = (scm_t_srcprops *) SCM_SMOB_DATA (obj); return 0; /* srcprops_chunks are not freed until leaving guile */ } why use a separate storage pool for srcprop objects? If optimized storage is needed, isn't it better to compress the srcprop a bit and use a double cell? -- Han-Wen Nienhuys - hanwen@xs4all.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel