Nick Ing-Simmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> John Tobey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Yup, and I realized one of my big problems to GCs that move memory
> >> (references that are pointers and such) really isn't, if we keep the
> >> two-level variable structure that we have now. The 'main' SV structure
> >> won't move, while the guts that the equivalent of sv_any points to can
> >> without a problem.
> >
> >I certainly hope this data layout factoid is still subject to change.
>
> Having an SV have a fixed address is handy for C extensions.
> The 'entity' has got to have some 'handle' to defines its existance.
> If not the SV* data structure then what is it that defines the thing?
Just like in Perl, if you want a reference to it, put it somewhere and
use a pointer. Otherwise, use it by value. (three words, or two if
flags are dropped, or four if vptr is added, or one if everything is
crammed into a pointer with low bits commandeered).
--
John Tobey, late nite hacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
\\\ ///
]]] With enough bugs, all eyes are shallow. [[[
/// \\\
