[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Restrictions

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 50 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 50 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

Am Tue, 06 Jan 2004 11:37:43 +0100 hat Michael Sperber <sperber@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> geschrieben:

"Felix" == Felix Winkelmann <felix@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

Felix> You normally don't cons that much in wrapped code: C doesn't know
Felix> about Scheme data. It cares about C data.

If that holds, then the current draft doesn't require you to do any GC
annotations on that code, and most of the problems go away.

Wrong, because the current draft passes around unconverted, live Scheme
data merrily, without worrying about the consequences. Instead give
C data to the C code. It's really not that hard to understand. Look how
the Gambit FFI does it, for example.

For C code where it doesn't hold, both the current draft and what you seem
to be suggesting cause problems.

Not at all. What problems do you mean? The amount of C code for which
this holds is small and some refactoring (reducing the consing to a few
distinct callbacks) does the trick in most cases. I can only judge
from experience, I can't prove it, of course.

Sure I don't cons much in wrapped code---but I cons often in the code
which does the wrapping, which comes down to the same thing.

You don't have to do that. Let Scheme or implementation-specific
glue code do that.