Re: Release 1.6 critical TODO items.

[Rob Browning]

Marius Vollmer <address@hidden> writes:

> gentemp created symbols that were unique in a given obarray, which had
> not much to do with the global hash table that holds all (interned)
> symbols.  when you had no other use for the obarray, using gentemp
> with a specific obarray was equivalent to using a specific prefix.

OK, so do I have to worry about thread safety?  (i.e. using mutexes)
if I'm using a counter to generate the unique syms?  I'm figuring I
probably do since multiple threads may be expanding syntax at the same
time.  Not a big deal to handle, just wanted to make sure the overhead
was required.

> Seriously, I feel a bit bad about not spending that much time with
> Guile lately.

Nah, don't worry about it.  It'll be fine.  I'm able to spend more
time ATM -- I figure everyone's availability will probably go in
cycles.

-- 
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org, @linuxdevel.com, and @debian.org
Previously @cs.utexas.edu
GPG=1C58 8B2C FB5E 3F64 EA5C  64AE 78FE E5FE F0CB A0AD