[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Hi,
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Han-Wen Nienhuys) writes:
>
>> There was a memory leak in the display routines, which was recently
>> fixed in the CVS branch.
>
> It's here:
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2005-11/msg00021.html .
> You seem
Hi,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Han-Wen Nienhuys) writes:
> There was a memory leak in the display routines, which was recently
> fixed in the CVS branch.
It's here:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2005-11/msg00021.html .
You seem to be using Guile 1.6, so maybe you'll be able to apply the
On Fri, 2005-12-30 at 21:20 +0100, Christian Mauduit wrote:
> I found out that the problem disappeared when I decided to make my free
> callback (the one set up with scm_set_smob_free) return systematically a
> value of 0. I understand the return value of this function should
> reflect the amount o
Han-Wen Nienhuys a écrit :
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Christian Mauduit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>The funny thing is that if I stop calling (display %my-smob) then all
>>the smobs are correctly freed when calling scm_gc().
>
>
> There was a memory leak in the display routines, whi
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Christian Mauduit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The funny thing is that if I stop calling (display %my-smob) then all
>the smobs are correctly freed when calling scm_gc().
There was a memory leak in the display routines, which was recently
fixed in the CVS branch. F
Hi all,
Currently hacking on http://www.gnu.org/software/liquidwar6/ I've had 2
problems with Guile and smobs. Hopefully the problems are solved and
I've found solutions which although not 100% satisfying have the merit
of "working". I'm just writing here to keep you informed of the
potential diff
