Greetings! Robert Boyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think I am finally starting to get it. > > If the value that the child wishes to return to the parent is not on the > stack and if all the storage allocation of the child has been done on the > stack, then the value in question must have been a valid pointer to an object > back in the parent. So far so good. > > But meanwhile the parent has been running. Maybe the parent gave up all its > pointers to the value in question and it got garbage collected or, even > worse, allocated as something new. It seems there needs to be knowledge of > which objects are being passed to the child and a holding on to them in the > parent, for gc purposes, until the child returns. > > Utterly ingenious. I'm not sure I see it entirely clearly, but I see some of > it. > Once I get this latest stuff committed, there is still at least one issue outstanding -- returning unreadable objects, eg. hash tables, compiled functions, etc. How much of an issue do you think this might be? The shortest way to get this that I can see would be to expand on the fasdump format to walk these objects and write them in binary to the stream, separated by appropriate escapes. Take care, > Thanks, > > Bob > > > > > > -- Camm Maguire [EMAIL PROTECTED] ========================================================================== "The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens." -- Baha'u'llah _______________________________________________ Gcl-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcl-devel
