From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?= Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: GC ?? Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 16:55:12 +0100 Organization: LAAS-CNRS Sender: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <20031203155509.GB878@powergnu.laas.fr> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1070467196 13184 80.91.224.253 (3 Dec 2003 15:59:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 15:59:56 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-user@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 03 16:59:53 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1ARZPs-0003nw-00 for ; Wed, 03 Dec 2003 16:59:53 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1ARaKa-0007jQ-Ky for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Wed, 03 Dec 2003 11:58:28 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1ARaJw-0007jG-G1 for guile-user@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Dec 2003 11:57:48 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1ARaJN-0007X2-BQ for guile-user@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Dec 2003 11:57:45 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.93.0.15] (helo=laas.laas.fr) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.24) id 1ARaIq-0007LI-Rm; Wed, 03 Dec 2003 11:56:41 -0500 Original-Received: by laas.laas.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id hB3FtCvj014769; Wed, 3 Dec 2003 16:55:12 +0100 (CET) Original-To: Stephen Compall Mail-Followup-To: Stephen Compall , guile-user@gnu.org Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-PGP-Fingerprint: 821D 815D 902A 7EAB 5CEE D120 7FBA 3D4F EB1F 5364 X-PGP-Key-ID: 0xEB1F5364 X-PGP-Key: http://ludo.humanoidz.org/ludovic.asc X-OS: GNU/Linux X-URL: http://ludo.humanoidz.org/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i [Guile enabled] X-Spam-Score: 0 () X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang at CNRS-LAAS X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2 Precedence: list List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:2438 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.user:2438 Hi, Today, 3 hours, 5 minutes, 19 seconds ago, Stephen Compall wrote: > Given this, do C functions that use SCM objects and presumably might > call GC at some point need to declare their SCM variables volatile? No. If a C function is passed (by Guile) an SCM object, Guile *knows* the underlying Scheme object is still referenced so it may not be garbage collected. Also, note that GC may only happen on scm_must_malloc () calls I think. Cheers, Ludovic. _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user