On Sep 22, 2011, at 7:12 PM, Eliot Miranda wrote:

> 
> 
> 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?

yes

> 
> 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.

excellent

> 
> 
> - 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