From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andy Wingo Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: bdw-gc includes in libguile.h Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 18:48:24 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87hbardqgw.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1306428537 10981 80.91.229.12 (26 May 2011 16:48:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 16:48:57 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org To: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu May 26 18:48:48 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QPdjp-0006ly-MW for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 26 May 2011 18:48:45 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38174 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QPdjp-0002lC-3O for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 26 May 2011 12:48:45 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:44618) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QPdjh-0002l6-GP for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 May 2011 12:48:43 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QPdjb-0004YH-Ob for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 May 2011 12:48:37 -0400 Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com ([64.74.157.62]:60759 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QPdjb-0004YA-MJ; Thu, 26 May 2011 12:48:31 -0400 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0806D517F; Thu, 26 May 2011 12:50:38 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=izTlYX+PuDDj sIFIE/v0x7cbebw=; b=E/RjfUZar7TMdSRYfdokRGMV8VZUOYlNx6mcONQCNML6 NZVuTeDWbLIN7vVirlyDCzYwxKdC3hEPnaxLHKouVlQtAjUfUTXkhrmmvfCDZ+XB CdoHD4LAsyhyOlB76/W5yh8lamtM9BVcjbP3iZnmOGypXgeIr/8AVg013M5+/pI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=EGi8WK qMZx0lnlCG7Yj38MUh2x64RJ0O1wk1UhLN9ZhkW4PigRoFENRDo9gg3WiDcH3IiW V9PcMtkc7vq4owiHefErD43yosS0Z8t25nZyfGJfjIWkmdlFxAM25gdPeHbXLLPY BQhdoP3czKeAtSVZe3JZFfMAVroO3FV8IhGBo= Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E974D517E; Thu, 26 May 2011 12:50:36 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from unquote.localdomain (unknown [90.164.198.39]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 53A34517D; Thu, 26 May 2011 12:50:35 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Andy Wingo's message of "Fri, 25 Mar 2011 19:44:04 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 47BFC55C-87B8-11E0-A005-D6B6226F3D4C-02397024!a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 64.74.157.62 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:12538 Archived-At: On Fri 25 Mar 2011 19:44, Andy Wingo writes: >>> I think that in 2.2 we should not expose libgc interfaces in libguile, >> >> That would be great, but then =E2=80=98scm_cell=E2=80=99, =E2=80=98SCM_N= EWSMOB=E2=80=99, etc. would >> need to do a function call, which we don=E2=80=99t want. Even if we did= want >> it, the change would break the ABI. > > I realize this :) That's why I am proposing it for 2.2, which will > (presumably) be ABI-incompatible. I don't think inlining NEWSMOB et al > actually buys us anything worth buying, so to speak. I pushed some fixes for this to stable-2.0 and to master. (The more invasive ones are in master). Please comment if the mood strikes you; we can revert things if they turn out to be wrong. Cheers, Andy --=20 http://wingolog.org/