* Re: gc question
2011-05-09 9:14 gc question rm
@ 2011-05-09 9:05 ` rixed
2011-05-09 9:34 ` rm
2011-05-09 10:00 ` Andy Wingo
1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: rixed @ 2011-05-09 9:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: guile-user
-[ 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.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: gc question
2011-05-09 9:34 ` rm
@ 2011-05-09 9:12 ` rixed
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: rixed @ 2011-05-09 9:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: guile-user
-[ Mon, May 09, 2011 at 11:34:21AM +0200, rm@tuxteam.de ]----
> But that talk was about symbols (which might well go aut of scope), im
> asking about _keywords_ whose semantics seem to be different.
Sorry I'm too new to notice the difference.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* gc question
@ 2011-05-09 9:14 rm
2011-05-09 9:05 ` rixed
2011-05-09 10:00 ` Andy Wingo
0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: rm @ 2011-05-09 9:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: guile-user
Dear list,
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?
TIA Ralf Mattes
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: gc question
2011-05-09 9:05 ` rixed
@ 2011-05-09 9:34 ` rm
2011-05-09 9:12 ` rixed
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: rm @ 2011-05-09 9:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: rixed, guile-user
On Mon, May 09, 2011 at 11:05:42AM +0200, rixed@happyleptic.org wrote:
> -[ 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.
But that talk was about symbols (which might well go aut of scope), im
asking about _keywords_ whose semantics seem to be different.
Cheers, RalfD
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: gc question
2011-05-09 9:14 gc question rm
2011-05-09 9:05 ` rixed
@ 2011-05-09 10:00 ` Andy Wingo
1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Andy Wingo @ 2011-05-09 10:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: rm; +Cc: guile-user
On Mon 09 May 2011 11:14, rm@tuxteam.de writes:
> 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?
I was about to answer:
No, this is not correct. Keywords can be garbage-collected.
However it does seem that currently, keywords are never
garbage-collected. That's probably a bug, though.
Andy
--
http://wingolog.org/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-05-09 10:00 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-05-09 9:14 gc question rm
2011-05-09 9:05 ` rixed
2011-05-09 9:34 ` rm
2011-05-09 9:12 ` rixed
2011-05-09 10:00 ` Andy Wingo
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).