On 8/23/07, felix winkelmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 8/23/07, Graham Fawcett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On my Chicken 2.5 instance, If one calls (gc) with no argument, a > > minor GC is performed. The documentation on the wiki suggests that it > > ought to perform a major GC, not a minor one. Is the documentation > > incorrect, or is this a change in behaviour? > > The docs are right. Please create a ticket for this.
On review, my problem was a misinterpretation of the docs. The wiki describes GC thus: "Invokes a garbage-collection and returns the number of free bytes in the heap. The flag specifies whether a minor (#f) or major (#t) GC is to be triggered. If no argument is given, #t is assumed. When the argument is #t, all pending finalizers are executed." I concluded that, since #t is assumed if no argument is given, therefore (gc) would execute the pending finalizers. (But that is not the case; and because the finalizers didn't execute, I assumed a minor GC had occurred.) If there are no objections, I'll modify the wiki, so that the last sentence reads, "An explicit #t argument will also cause all pending finalizers to be executed." Graham _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
