At 11:36 PM 2/11/2001 -0500, Sam Tregar wrote:
>On Sun, 11 Feb 2001, Jan Dubois wrote:
>
> > However, I couldn't solve the problem of "deterministic destruction
> > behavior": Currently Perl will call DESTROY on any object as soon as the
> > last reference to it goes out of scope. This becomes im
On Sun, 11 Feb 2001, Jan Dubois wrote:
> However, I couldn't solve the problem of "deterministic destruction
> behavior": Currently Perl will call DESTROY on any object as soon as the
> last reference to it goes out of scope. This becomes important if the
> object own scarce external resources (
crossed to -internals
Jan Dubois:
> Not necessarily; you would have to implement it that way: When you try to
> open a file and you don't succeed, you run the garbage collector and try
> again. But what happens in the case of XS code: some external library
> tries to open a file and gets a failu
On Sun, 11 Feb 2001 21:11:09 -0500, "Bryan C. Warnock"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Sunday 11 February 2001 19:08, Jan Dubois wrote:
>> However, I couldn't solve the problem of "deterministic destruction
>> behavior": Currently Perl will call DESTROY on any object as soon as the
>> last referen
On Sunday 11 February 2001 19:08, Jan Dubois wrote:
> However, I couldn't solve the problem of "deterministic destruction
> behavior": Currently Perl will call DESTROY on any object as soon as the
> last reference to it goes out of scope. This becomes important if the
> object own scarce external
On Fri, 09 Feb 2001 13:19:36 -0500, Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Almost all refcounting schemes are messy. That's one of its problems. A
>mark and sweep GC system tends to be less prone to leaks because of program
>bugs, and when it *does* leak, the leaks tend to be large. Plus the
[Please be careful with attributions -- I didn't write any
of the quoted material...]
Russ Allbery wrote:
> >> sub test {
> >> my($foo, $bar, %baz);
> >> ...
> >> return \%baz;
> >> }
> That's a pretty fundamental aspect of the Perl language; I use that sort
Bart Lateur wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Feb 2001 12:06:12 -0500, Ken Fox wrote:
> > 1. Cheap allocations. Most fast collectors have a one or two
> >instruction malloc. In C it looks like this:
> >
> > void *malloc(size) { void *obj = heap; heap += size; return obj; }
> > ...
>
> That is not a ga
You should probably also take a look a Debian's packaging, the .deb.
It consists of an ar archive containing three files: one for the magic
(named debian-binary, containing "2.0"), one for the filesystem image
(filesystem.tar.gz)
On Fri, Feb 09, 2001 at 06:17:34PM -0200, Branden wrote:
> | Pla
On Fri, 9 Feb 2001 16:14:34 -0800, Mark Koopman wrote:
>but is this an example of the way people SHOULD code, or simply are ABLE to
>code this. are we considering to deprecate this type of bad style, and force
>to a programmer to, in this case, supply a ref to %baz in the arguements to
>this s
10 matches
Mail list logo
