Re: gen gc

[Marius Vollmer]

Han-Wen <address@hidden> writes:

> address@hidden writes:
>
> > It would be cool if you could fake it.  It doesn't need to be the real
> > memory address of the object, just a unique integer.
> 
> What if I can't?

Then we can remove object-address.  If people need something like it,
we can keep it, but with a different name and the warning that the
address of an object might change over its lifetime.

> Memory cells are going to move around. I don't see a way to generate
> a unique number without making some kind of table for objects
> subjected to object-address.

Yes.  But for a deprecation period, this will be good enough, no?

> Btw, I can imagine that internal hash tables might use the address of
> a cell as a source for a hash index. Does that happen anywhere?

Yes, in scm_ihashq and scm_ihashv and maybe elsewhere.  There are
techniques to deal with this, I believe...