From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andy Wingo Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: gc question Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 12:00:19 +0200 Message-ID: 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 1304935238 14920 80.91.229.12 (9 May 2011 10:00:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 10:00:38 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-user@gnu.org To: rm@tuxteam.de Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon May 09 12:00:34 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 1QJNGU-0005Zj-8t for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Mon, 09 May 2011 12:00:34 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40687 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QJNGT-0007kt-Qn for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Mon, 09 May 2011 06:00:33 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:42159) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QJNGO-0007ke-6a for guile-user@gnu.org; Mon, 09 May 2011 06:00:32 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QJNGM-0001o2-Qw for guile-user@gnu.org; Mon, 09 May 2011 06:00:28 -0400 Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com ([64.74.157.62]:33359 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QJNGM-0001nu-Og for guile-user@gnu.org; Mon, 09 May 2011 06:00:26 -0400 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79E132EDD; Mon, 9 May 2011 06:02:31 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=yyAll0F8uYSVkZhA4wpVRpV83+U=; b=JLq6vW AKTzedG1Y72Ec4fNj3sKZeM6gPH6jGlV5LcrnjzVxAPQYdPxPkBkjrPAg+b/8V3i mLBq0+a3dhZ6PJpTxxelHZkGec3T2+vmt+NBv7KFZHgu/5lIfhWwCjIMenF5WgOg L+yvJBYHSaPOsbKweSjH2CZxxTNIqX0jJhNbk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=yQcOluPtzZFKWOR4rCB2qhHnk7bGAoEK UUKhEFqCvKh4v+rqMxlferqMtcsz87UCfuTGMBCDjBalkFWVM3dckhNTx2NGKoR0 YrdXSbDYQ4o2tMQgp9httmtodKPPJ1wCbZfr92NU0qRogoj8dkrEHRu3Ba+HDIVi sorj99/xM8Y= Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65F092EDC; Mon, 9 May 2011 06:02:30 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from unquote.localdomain (unknown [90.164.198.39]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8F6192EDB; Mon, 9 May 2011 06:02:26 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20110509091411.GA14837@seid-online.de> (rm@tuxteam.de's message of "Mon, 9 May 2011 11:14:11 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 739758FE-7A23-11E0-8EB2-90BEB0B5FC3A-02397024!a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 64.74.157.62 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:8617 Archived-At: 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/