From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Neil Jerram Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: typo in guile doc? Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2009 12:52:17 +0000 Message-ID: <87ljgo1svy.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> References: <20091226232250.GA4209@lars-x200s.resnet.ust.hk> <87skawhd7p.fsf@ambire.localdomain> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1261918360 24547 80.91.229.12 (27 Dec 2009 12:52:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2009 12:52:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-user , Thien-Thi Nguyen To: Chengqi Song Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 27 13:52:33 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-user@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1NOsbo-0004Cj-Qz for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Sun, 27 Dec 2009 13:52:33 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52862 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NOsbo-0006gk-W7 for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Sun, 27 Dec 2009 07:52:33 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NOsbj-0006gK-RW for guile-user@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Dec 2009 07:52:27 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NOsbf-0006fs-D7 for guile-user@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Dec 2009 07:52:27 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=46443 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NOsbf-0006fp-5t for guile-user@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Dec 2009 07:52:23 -0500 Original-Received: from mail3.uklinux.net ([80.84.72.33]:51970) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NOsbe-0003kG-Pt for guile-user@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Dec 2009 07:52:22 -0500 Original-Received: from arudy (host81-153-58-148.range81-153.btcentralplus.com [81.153.58.148]) by mail3.uklinux.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F7EC1F679F; Sun, 27 Dec 2009 12:52:21 +0000 (GMT) Original-Received: from arudy (arudy [127.0.0.1]) by arudy (Postfix) with ESMTP id B118D38024; Sun, 27 Dec 2009 12:52:17 +0000 (GMT) In-Reply-To: <87skawhd7p.fsf@ambire.localdomain> (Thien-Thi Nguyen's message of "Sun, 27 Dec 2009 12:24:10 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4-2.6 X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:7572 Archived-At: Thien-Thi Nguyen writes: > () Chengqi Song > () Sun, 27 Dec 2009 07:22:50 +0800 > > "By calling this function, the garbage collector learns > about all references that your SMOB has to other SCM values." > > what is "has to other SCM values"? is it a typo? > > Perhaps that object contains (points to, references) other > sub-objects. The SMOB's mark function must call (back to) Guile's > mark function for those sub-objects. In this way the collector learns. > If the mark function fails to do that, the collector remains ignorant. We could rewrite this as: > "By calling this function, the garbage collector learns > about the other SCM values (if any) that your SMOB refers to." Would that be clearer? Also please note that this is different in Guile 1.9.x. (In summary, the mark function isn't needed any more.) If you're writing something new, you may want to consider targeting Guile 1.9.x instead of 1.8.x. Regards, Neil