From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Neil Jerram Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel,gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: The order of objects returned from a guardian Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 23:37:40 +0100 Message-ID: <42E95E34.10903@ossau.uklinux.net> References: <873bq1gn15.fsf@zagadka.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1122592155 32672 80.91.229.2 (28 Jul 2005 23:09:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 23:09:15 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-user@gnu.org, guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 29 01:09:12 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DyHUY-0007nw-Fx for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 29 Jul 2005 01:08:42 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DyHX1-00063N-42 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 19:11:15 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DyHRe-0004bL-5z for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 19:05:42 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DyHRb-0004aM-2A for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 19:05:40 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DyHQr-0004B2-KA; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 19:04:53 -0400 Original-Received: from [80.84.72.33] (helo=mail3.uklinux.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DyHDV-0007SZ-B1; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 18:51:05 -0400 Original-Received: from laruns (host81-130-135-9.in-addr.btopenworld.com [81.130.135.9]) by mail3.uklinux.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EB18409FAD; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 22:39:23 +0000 (UTC) Original-Received: from [127.0.0.1] (laruns [127.0.0.1]) by laruns (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EA8A9F106; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 23:37:41 +0100 (BST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050513 Debian/1.7.8-1 X-Accept-Language: en Original-To: Marius Vollmer In-Reply-To: <873bq1gn15.fsf@zagadka.de> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.91.0.0 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:5174 gmane.lisp.guile.user:4658 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.user:4658 Marius Vollmer wrote: > > So, do you rely on this ordering guarantee? No, my uses of guardians don't rely on this. Also I'm pretty sure that I'd expect any object added to a guardian to be returned when that object becomes inaccessible. If cycles can make this untrue, even when the whole cycle is inaccessible, that's pretty bad. So I'm happy with your proposal. > If you do, you would need to take care of the ordering yourself, which > is quite easy by keeping objects alive in a global data structure > until they are no longer needed. Not sure what you mean by this, though. How would this generate an ordering? Neil _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel