guile-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: request reversion regarding scm_i_* removal


From: Ludovic Courtès
Subject: Re: request reversion regarding scm_i_* removal
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 13:52:32 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux)

Hi!

Andy Wingo <address@hidden> writes:

> Guile-gnome does, when registering a new port type, for gnome-vfs. The
> port API isn't threadsafe, and also sucks as I mentioned ;) From
> gnome-vfs/gnome/gw/gnome-vfs-port.c:
>
> #define LOCK scm_i_pthread_mutex_lock (&scm_i_port_table_mutex)
> #define UNLOCK scm_i_pthread_mutex_unlock (&scm_i_port_table_mutex)

Then would it be sufficient for Guile-GNOME if `scm_i_port_table_mutex'
and `scm_i_symbol_length ()' were kept public?

> Also there's the bit in the flush() vfunc about scm_i_terminating.

Normally, `really_cleanup_for_exit ()' calls `scm_flush_all_ports ()'
upon exit.  A quick test through GDB shows that `scm_i_terminating',
whose sole purpose is to indicate fport code that exception handling
cannot be used, is always zero.  Did you encounter situations where it
was needed?

Thanks,
Ludo'.





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]