On 2008 Sep 7, at 6:23, Ganesh Sittampalam wrote:
On Sat, 6 Sep 2008, Ashley Yakeley wrote:
Ganesh Sittampalam wrote:
The set of ACIO expressions exp is the "static initialisers" of
M. The RTS must note when each static initialiser is run, and
cache its result val. Let's call this cache of vals the "static
results cache" of M.
When M is loaded, and a static results cache for M already
exists, then it will be used for the vals of M.
This sounds "reachable" to me, and therefore static overhead and
not a leak.
You can call it what you like, but it's still unacceptable
behaviour, particularly since clients of M will have no way of
telling from its API that it will happen.
That what will happen?
That memory will be used and not ever be reclaimable.
Suppose I am writing something that I intend to be used as part of a
plug-in that is reloaded in different forms again and again. And I
see module K which does something I want, so I use it. It so happens
that K uses M, which has a <-. If I knew that using K in my plug-in
would cause a memory leak, I would avoid doing so; but since the
whole point of <- is to avoid making the need for some state visible
in the API.
False, as it's in ACIO and therefore advertises that it will "leak
memory" in the name of correct behavior. Since you consider memory
leaks to be worse than correct behavior, you can avoid anything that
uses ACIO. (But you might want to go look at that list of modules
which do global variable initialization and therefore aren't entirely
trustworthy unless something like ACIO exists.)
--
brandon s. allbery [solaris,freebsd,perl,pugs,haskell] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
system administrator [openafs,heimdal,too many hats] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon university KF8NH
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
