[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Fri, 14 May 2004 09:03:33 +0200, Han-Wen a dit :
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >> +LY_DEFINE (ly_clone_parser, "ly:clone-parser",
> >> + 1, 0, 0,
> >> + (SCM parser_smob),
> >> + "Return a clone of PARSER_SMOB.")
> >> +{
> >> + My_lily_parser *parser = unsmob_my_lily_parser (parser_smob);
> >> + My_lily_parser *clone = new My_lily_parser (*parser);
> >> + return clone->self_scm ();
> >> +}
>
> > nitpick: you should do
>
> > return scm_gc_unprotect_object (clone->self_scm ());
>
> OK. I've seen several occurences of this pattern in the source code,
> but wasn't sure of what it meant, for I didn't find the definition of
> scm_gc_unprotect_object in the guile reference manual. Does it means
> that the object is made garbage-collectable? (for an unknown reason my
Yes. The protection is necessary because the C++ object is not
referenced as an SCM from the C++ stack.
>
> nicolas
>
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
