On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 6:17 AM, Dimitry Golubovsky <[email protected]>wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Markus Denker wrote:
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> There are two changesets waiting for integrating in 1.4 that have
> serious consequences:
>
> - Ephemerons. The VM level changes are in the Cog VMs build on
> Jenkins, but have not
>  been integrated in the VMMaker codebase.
>
>        http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=4265


I would *really* like to back out these changes.  The Ephemeron
implementation is very much a prototype, requiring a hack to determine
whether an object is an ephemeron (the presence of a  marker class in the
first inst var) that I'm not at all happy with.  There is a neater
implementation available via using an unused instSpec which IMO has
significant advantages (much simpler & faster, instSpec is valid at all
times, including during compaction, less overhead, doesn't require a marker
class), and is the route I'm taking with the new GC/object-representation
I'm working on now.  Note that other than determining whether an object is
an ephemeron (instSpec/format vs inst var test) the rest of Igor's code
remains the same.  I'd like to avoid too much VM forking.  Would you all
consider putting these changes on hold for now?

If so, I'll make the effort to produce prototype changes (in the area of
ClassBuilder and class definition; no VM code necessary as yet) to allow
defining Ephemerons via the int spec route by next week at the latest.

>
>
> - Finalization code checks for #hasNewFinalization
>  This is true in the current VMs build in Jenkins, but in older VMs
> this is not in.
>
>        http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=4483
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Since my Android-related branch has not been integrated into the
> mainline: where should I merge this from to be in sync? Is this
> back-compatible with Pharo 1.3?
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> Dimitry Golubovsky
>
> Anywhere on the Web
>
>


-- 
best,
Eliot

Reply via email to