From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: rixed@happyleptic.org Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: gc question Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 11:05:42 +0200 Message-ID: <20110509090542.GC16764@ccellier.rd.happyleptic.org> References: <20110509091411.GA14837@seid-online.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1304931966 29010 80.91.229.12 (9 May 2011 09:06:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 09:06:06 +0000 (UTC) To: guile-user@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon May 09 11:06:03 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-user@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 1QJMPg-0007F7-IT for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Mon, 09 May 2011 11:06:00 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38006 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QJMPf-0004Tw-Tb for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Mon, 09 May 2011 05:05:59 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:37029) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QJMPc-0004Tc-2k for guile-user@gnu.org; Mon, 09 May 2011 05:05:56 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QJMPa-0007Vm-R5 for guile-user@gnu.org; Mon, 09 May 2011 05:05:55 -0400 Original-Received: from dangi.happyleptic.org ([92.243.13.193]:54408) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QJMPa-0007VJ-MA for guile-user@gnu.org; Mon, 09 May 2011 05:05:54 -0400 Original-Received: from extranet.securactive.org ([82.234.213.170] helo=ccellier.rd.securactive.lan) by dangi with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QJMRA-0008PN-9C for guile-user@gnu.org; Mon, 09 May 2011 11:07:32 +0200 Original-Received: from rixed by ccellier.rd.securactive.lan with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QJMPO-0001Pp-Fc for guile-user@gnu.org; Mon, 09 May 2011 11:05:42 +0200 Mail-Followup-To: rixed@happyleptic.org, guile-user@gnu.org Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110509091411.GA14837@seid-online.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 92.243.13.193 X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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 Original-Sender: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:8613 Archived-At: -[ Mon, May 09, 2011 at 11:14:11AM +0200, rm@tuxteam.de ]---- > am I correct in assuming that the return value from > scm_from_locale_keyword("unknown"); > won't ever be garbage collected od do I have to protect > it? >From an IRC discussion some time ago: 16:11 < rixed> BTW, is it required to scm_gc_protect_object a symbol ? 16:11 < civodul> no 16:13 < rixed> civodul: even with guile 1.8? 16:14 < civodul> in 1.8 you have to protect it 16:14 < civodul> but you should use the snarfing macros 16:14 < civodul> SCM_SYMBOL and SCM_GLOBAL_SYMBOL 16:14 < rixed> civodul: well, probably, but that's my first project using guile so I'd rather do it by hand - I find it actualy simpler :) 16:14 < dsmith-work> Wasn't there some recent changes that allow symbols to be gc'd? 16:16 < civodul> rixed: ok; so if you want both 1.8 and 1.6, then always scm_gc_protect_object 16:16 < civodul> s/1.6/2.0/ 16:29 < rixed> civodul: will do. thanx! So I'd say it depends on the target guile version.