Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
I'm not sure to understand the meaning of "MELT GC being incompatible
with GGC one". On the contrary, it is designed to be compatible, it is
compatble in practice, and it works quite well.
If an ggc_collect_with_local scheme is not possible (but I repeat that I
find it simpler, more efficient, and even perhaps more elegant), I have
always the possibility of having static vectors for every such type of
stuff (ie one vector of gimple, another of gimple_seq, another of
tree-s, and so forth) and generate code which pushes value there.
Generating code which directly marks (in the GGC collector) stuff would
be simpler [this means a solution like the ggc_collect_with_local I just
suggested], but I can do without. By the way, the
Sorry, I forgot a sentence here. I mean that
By the way, the current MELT handing of MELT values is to copy them
(before calling ggc_collect) in a static vector, and the same scheme can
be extended for other stuff. But a ggc_collect_with_local would be
simpler (and more efficient, avoiding copying into vectors).
Regards.
--
Basile STARYNKEVITCH http://starynkevitch.net/Basile/
email: basile<at>starynkevitch<dot>net mobile: +33 6 8501 2359
8, rue de la Faiencerie, 92340 Bourg La Reine, France
*** opinions {are only mines, sont seulement les miennes} ***
