[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: I don't believe in "(may GC)"
Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 17:21:41 -0800 (PST)
From: Tom Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
The draft FFI says:
char * SCHEME_EXTRACT_STRING(scheme_value)
Neither says "(may GC)".
If I'm using some exotic number representation (constructive reals,
perhaps), then EXTRACT_DOUBLE may very well involve some pretty hairy,
hence possibly GC-causing, computation.
This doesn't worry me too much; there aren't a lot of such
If I'm using some exotic string representations (I'm working on a
functional-splay-tree string type for Pika) -- same deal:
extract-string may take some (possibly GC-causing) work.
This does worry me (it's listed in the 'issues' section of the SRFI).
I think we went overboard here. Something like
SCHEME_EXTRACT_STRING_CONTENTS(scheme_value, index, count, buffer)
which copies 'count' characters starting from 'index' into 'buffer'
would be better. Presumably this can be done without GCing.
Even something innocent like:
can cause GC if my implementation let's me attach to a hook in its
Again, I don't think this will be very common. Is there an existing
implementation for which this (or anything similar) is an issue?