Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[ perlscalar moprh ]
> But that can be solved by first clearing str_val, then changing the
> vtable.
Fixed. I currently don't see any more problems related to perscalars.
PerlStrings are unsafe per se, as long as we have the copying GC. They
need a loc
Gordon Henriksen wrote:
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
No, flags are mutable and per PMC *not* per class.
Of course there are flags which must remain per-PMC. I wasn't
referring to them. Sorry if that wasn't clear.
If a flag is only saying "my VTABLE methods use the UnionVal as {a
void*/a PObj*/a PMC*/dat
Gordon Henriksen wrote:
Hm. Well, both are a discriminator, then; dispatch to code which
presumes the contents of the union is quite frequently done without
examining the flags.
The flags are *never* consulted for a vtable call in classes/*. DOD does
different things if a Buffer or PMC is looked
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> Gordon Henriksen wrote:
>
> > Or, hell, put the flags directly in the VTABLE if it's not
> > necessary for them to vary across instances.
>
> No, flags are mutable and per PMC *not* per class.
Of course there are flags which must remain per-PMC. I wasn't
referring to t
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[ PObj union ]
> Still, point taken. That needs to die and it needs to die now. For
> the moment, lets split it into two pieces, a buffer pointer and an
> int/float union, so we don't have to guess whether the contents have
> issues with threads.
The Buffe
Gordon Henriksen wrote:
Er? Extending to the rest of the source tree the huge patch to
classes which you already applied. No logic changes; just
cleaning those PObj accessor macros up.
Ah sorry, that one. Please send in small bunches, a few files changed at
once.
leo
Dan Sugalski wrote:
> Gordon Henriksen wrote:
>
> > Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> >
> > > Gordon Henriksen wrote:
> > >
> > > > ... Best example: morph. morph must die.
> > >
> > > Morph is necessary. But please note: morph changes the vtable of
> > > the PMC to point to the new data types table. It h
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> Gordon Henriksen wrote:
>
> > ... in the multi-thousand-
> > line-diff it was, yet. :( Else you'd have the patch already
>
> 1) *no* multi-thousands line diffs
> 2) what is the problem, you like to solve?
Er? Extending to the rest of the source tree the huge patch to
cl
At 1:47 AM + 1/25/04, Pete Lomax wrote:
On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 13:59:26 -0500, Gordon Henriksen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It doesn't matter if an int field could read half of a double or v.v.;
it won't crash the program. Only pointers matter.
These rules ensure that dereferencing a pointer will
At 10:50 AM -0500 1/24/04, Gordon Henriksen wrote:
On Saturday, January 24, 2004, at 09:23 , Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Gordon Henriksen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
... Best example: morph. morph must die.
Morph is necessary. But please note: morph changes the vtable of
the PMC to point to the new da
Gordon Henriksen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>> Increasing the union size, so that each pointer is distinct is not an
>> option. This imposes considerable overhead on a non-threaded program
>> too, due its bigger PMC size.
> That was the brute-force approach, separating ou
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Gordon Henriksen wrote:
I overstated when I said that morph must die. morph could live IF:
[ long proposal ]
Increasing the union size, so that each pointer is distinct is not an
option. This imposes considerable overhead on a non-threaded program
too, due its bigger PMC
Gordon Henriksen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I overstated when I said that morph must die. morph could live IF:
[ long proposal ]
Increasing the union size, so that each pointer is distinct is not an
option. This imposes considerable overhead on a non-threaded program
too, due its bigger PMC si
Pete Lomax wrote:
Gordon Henriksen wrote:
It doesn't matter if an int field could read half of a double or v.v.;
it won't crash the program. Only pointers matter.
These rules ensure that dereferencing a pointer will not segfault.
In this model, wouldn't catching the segfault and retrying (once
On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 13:59:26 -0500, Gordon Henriksen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>It doesn't matter if an int field could read half of a double or v.v.;
>it won't crash the program. Only pointers matter.
>These rules ensure that dereferencing a pointer will not segfault.
In this model, wouldn't
I wrote:
With this vocabulary:
variable: A memory location which is reachable (i.e., not
garbage). [*]
pointer: The address of a variable.
pointer variable: A variable which contains a pointer.
access: For a pointer p, any dereference of p—*p, p->field, or
p[i]—whether for the purposes of re
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Gordon Henriksen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
... Best example: morph. morph must die.
Morph is necessary. But please note: morph changes the vtable of the
PMC to point to the new data types table. It has nothing to do with a
typed union.
I overstated when I said that morph
On Saturday, January 24, 2004, at 09:23 , Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Gordon Henriksen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
... Best example: morph. morph must die.
Morph is necessary. But please note: morph changes the vtable of the
PMC to point to the new data types table. It has nothing to do with a
typed
Gordon Henriksen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ... Best example: morph. morph must die.
Morph is necessary. But please note: morph changes the vtable of the PMC
to point to the new data types table. It has nothing to do with a typed
union.
> Gordon Henriksen
leo
19 matches
Mail list logo
