[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Is my procedure getting GCed?
From: |
Dirk Herrmann |
Subject: |
Re: Is my procedure getting GCed? |
Date: |
Tue, 15 May 2001 11:49:20 +0200 (MEST) |
On Tue, 15 May 2001, Dirk Herrmann wrote:
> On 15 May 2001, Marius Vollmer wrote:
>
> > Dirk Herrmann <address@hidden> writes:
> >
> > > I don't know about how this works with shared libraries, though:
> > > What happens if you unlink a shared lib, but still have pointers
> > > into global variables belonging to that lib?
> > [some horror scenario deleted :-)]
> > Err, well, it wont work. But we already have the same situation with
> > primitive functions supplied from shared libraries. I think we can
> > solve this problem, but its low on my list.
>
> I guess we may take this as a supporting voice for the "We should have a
> way to add roots for gc" idea, right?
BTW, roots for gc would also allow us to get rid of the scm_sys_protects
array and thus allow to put the corresponding definitions at the places
where they belong.
Best regards,
Dirk Herrmann
- Is my procedure getting GCed?, Brett Viren, 2001/05/01
- Re: Is my procedure getting GCed?, Michael Livshin, 2001/05/01
- Re: Is my procedure getting GCed?, Brett Viren, 2001/05/01
- Re: Is my procedure getting GCed?, Bill Gribble, 2001/05/01
- Re: Is my procedure getting GCed?, Michael Livshin, 2001/05/01
- Re: Is my procedure getting GCed?, Dirk Herrmann, 2001/05/07
- Re: Is my procedure getting GCed?, Michael Livshin, 2001/05/07
- Re: Is my procedure getting GCed?, Marius Vollmer, 2001/05/14
- Re: Is my procedure getting GCed?, Dirk Herrmann, 2001/05/14
- Re: Is my procedure getting GCed?,
Dirk Herrmann <=
- Re: Is my procedure getting GCed?, Brett Viren, 2001/05/01
- Re: Is my procedure getting GCed?, Marius Vollmer, 2001/05/01
- Re: Is my procedure getting GCed?, Dale P. Smith, 2001/05/01
- Re: Is my procedure getting GCed?, Jed Davis, 2001/05/02