[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: More over-engineering
From: |
Aurélien Aptel |
Subject: |
Re: More over-engineering |
Date: |
Fri, 27 Nov 2015 18:12:30 +0100 |
On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 6:00 PM, Stefan Monnier
<address@hidden> wrote:
> Are we really allocating a structure for every Lisp_Object value we pass
> through the modules API? Why do that?
Look at the old thread for Philip's arguments. As far as I'm
concerned, we need an indirect pointer to support wide-int
Lisp_Objects on 32bit platforms. Global reference can still be made
with the current code. We have a reference counting hash-table to keep
track of them. Non-global refs are marked explicitely in case the GC
misses them.
- More over-engineering, Stefan Monnier, 2015/11/27
- Re: More over-engineering,
Aurélien Aptel <=
- Re: More over-engineering, David Kastrup, 2015/11/27
- Re: More over-engineering, Stefan Monnier, 2015/11/27
- Re: More over-engineering, Eli Zaretskii, 2015/11/27
- Re: More over-engineering, Stefan Monnier, 2015/11/27
- Re: More over-engineering, Eli Zaretskii, 2015/11/27
- Re: More over-engineering, Stefan Monnier, 2015/11/27
- Re: More over-engineering, Eli Zaretskii, 2015/11/28
- Re: More over-engineering, Stefan Monnier, 2015/11/28
- Re: More over-engineering, Eli Zaretskii, 2015/11/28
- Re: More over-engineering, Paul Eggert, 2015/11/28