[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Passing SCM values around as void *
From: |
divoplade |
Subject: |
Re: Passing SCM values around as void * |
Date: |
Mon, 21 Sep 2020 22:32:44 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Evolution 3.34.2 |
Please ignore, the fix does not work.
Le lundi 21 septembre 2020 à 22:18 +0200, divoplade a écrit :
> Hello guile users,
>
> I have just found out a non-reproducible bug in my code on a (more
> complex) version of this. Since it is not reproducible anyway, I will
> not put a full example. This is just pseudo-code.
>
> /* This function calls get with ctx until it is satisfied. get should
> fill its third argument with as many bytes as its second argument. */
> void work (void *ctx, int (*get) (void *, size_t, char *));
>
> /* The guile callback returns a bytevector */
> static void
> get_as_scm (void *ctx, size_t n, char *dest)
> {
> SCM *f = ctx;
> SCM ret = scm_call_1 (*f, scm_from_size_t (n));
> SCM_ASSERT (scm_c_bytevector_length (ret) == n,
> *f, SCM_ARG1, "work");
> memcpy (dest, SCM_BYTEVECTOR_CONTENTS (ret), n);
> }
>
> static SCM
> guile_work (SCM arg)
> {
> void *ctx = &arg;
> work (ctx, get_as_scm);
>
> // This fixes the bug, it seems.
> scm_remember_upto_here_1 (arg);
> }
>
> I do not seem to have a bug if the callback does not allocate a
> return
> value.
>
> The underlying question is: how to pass SCM values as void *, and
> still
> protect them from garbage collection? Do I need to call
> scm_remember_upto_here_1 manually like I did, without any hint in the
> manual, or is it just hiding the bug? It seems that the problem does
> not happen with guile 2.2.
>
> Best regards,
>
> divoplade
>
>