Hi! Andy Wingo <wi...@pobox.com> skribis:
> I just fixed a long-standing memory leak in Guile 2.0. (I say that like > I'm proud or something, but of course I was the one the introduced it in > the first place!) Excellent! > See c05805a4ea764dec5a0559edefcdfb9761191d07 in stable-2.0 for the > gnarly details. The summary is that applicable smobs were being leaked, > because they were referenced in the values of weak-key tables. I was wondering whether removing ‘smob-call’ would break binary compatibility, but presumably that instruction could not possibly end up in user bytecode on disk, right? Thanks, Ludo’.
