Hello! Andy Wingo <wi...@pobox.com> writes:
> On Fri 25 Mar 2011 19:06, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > >> Andy Wingo <wi...@pobox.com> writes: [...] >>> I think that in 2.2 we should not expose libgc interfaces in libguile, >> >> That would be great, but then ‘scm_cell’, ‘SCM_NEWSMOB’, etc. would >> need to do a function call, which we don’t want. Even if we did want >> it, the change would break the ABI. > > I realize this :) That's why I am proposing it for 2.2, which will > (presumably) be ABI-incompatible. OK. > I don't think inlining NEWSMOB et al actually buys us anything worth > buying, so to speak. Yes, I agree. Internally we should still inline scm_cell & co., though; that can be done without exposing <gc/gc.h> in public headers I guess. (Actually, we should inline scm_cons, too, internally.) >> A meta-comment: can we agree to take more time to discuss this sort of >> things? I’ll try to be responsive, and the earth won’t stop spinning if >> the fix waits a couple of days. ;-) > > Sure. Sorry for the precipitous action. That said, this bug has been > open since September: https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?32436 Oh indeed, I hadn’t realized there’s a connection; still... Thanks, Ludo’.
