Hello, Andy Wingo <wi...@pobox.com> writes:
> On Thu 06 Aug 2009 18:30, Ken Raeburn <raeb...@raeburn.org> writes: > >> On Aug 5, 2009, at 10:06, I wrote: >>> (3) My four-year-old comments on scm_enter/leave_guile, recorded in >>> threads.c around line 300, still stand.... Those functions really >>> ought to go away. At least they're confined to one file, now. Some >>> of it looks a little messy, but I can probably get rid of some of the >>> uses.... >> >> I've made a bit of progress on this. > > The patches look good to me; my only wonder is what relation they have > to the BDW-GC branch Ludovic was working on. If BDW will land before > 2.0, then perhaps all this mess can go away (wishful thinking); > otherwise we should apply it now (after the release). Ludovic? :) Exactly. I've been meaning to reply to this thread because of this. These functions don't do much in the BDW-GC branch: http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guile.git/tree/libguile/threads.c?h=boehm-demers-weiser-gc#n379 Likewise, `scm_without_guile ()' does a `GC_do_blocking ()', but in many cases `scm_without_guile ()' is not needed because BDW-GC doesn't rely on cooperation from all threads to work. And yes, I do hope to have it part of 2.0, but I haven't taken the time to update it lately. Thanks, Ludo'.
