Marius Vollmer wrote:
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
what happens if the weak (c[ad]r ITEM) is marked through a postponed
weak vector that you haven't processed yet? Then P is removed
erroneously, or am I missing something?
Hmm, you are right. I first have thought about this behavior as a
feature, but I now see that it is in fact not wanted. The order the
weak vectors are processed in affects the result, which is not good,
obviously.
Right now, I hope to get around this by repeatedly scanning all weak
vectors until no new markings have taken place, and only then remove
the unmarked items.
Hi;
isn't it possible to store the 'module property in a doubly weak hash
table? What you propose sounds very costly , and my gut instinct says
that I can punch a hole in it as well.
Thanks for pointing this out!
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen
_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
