[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: MPS: weak hash tables
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: MPS: weak hash tables |
Date: |
Tue, 02 Jul 2024 18:35:23 +0300 |
> Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2024 15:03:44 +0000
> From: Pip Cet <pipcet@protonmail.com>
> Cc: Gerd Möllmann <gerd.moellmann@gmail.com>, eller.helmut@gmail.com,
> emacs-devel@gnu.org
>
> That means we must do one of the following:
>
> 1. mangle all Lisp_Objects to pointers or fixnums when storing them in a weak
> hash table, and unmangle them upon retrieval
> 2. not use 32-bit x86 machines
> 3. modify MPS
> 4. throw caution to the wind and just hope it works
I don't understand why (1) is needed. Lisp objects are already
pointers in disguise, so what exactly is the problem here?
I also don't understand how come an _optimization_ turned out to do us
some harm.
- Re: MPS: weak hash tables, (continued)
- Re: MPS: weak hash tables, Gerd Möllmann, 2024/07/02
- Re: MPS: weak hash tables, Pip Cet, 2024/07/02
- Re: MPS: weak hash tables, Gerd Möllmann, 2024/07/02
- Re: MPS: weak hash tables, Gerd Möllmann, 2024/07/02
- Re: MPS: weak hash tables, Gerd Möllmann, 2024/07/02
- Re: MPS: weak hash tables, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/07/02
- Re: MPS: weak hash tables, Gerd Möllmann, 2024/07/02
- Re: MPS: weak hash tables, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/07/02
- Re: MPS: weak hash tables, Pip Cet, 2024/07/02
- Re: MPS: weak hash tables, Helmut Eller, 2024/07/02
- Re: MPS: weak hash tables,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: MPS: weak hash tables, Pip Cet, 2024/07/02
- Re: MPS: weak hash tables, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/07/02
- Re: MPS: weak hash tables, Pip Cet, 2024/07/02
- Re: MPS: weak hash tables, Gerd Möllmann, 2024/07/03
- Re: MPS: weak hash tables, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/07/03
- Re: MPS: weak hash tables, Gerd Möllmann, 2024/07/03
- Re: MPS: weak hash tables, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/07/02
- Re: MPS: weak hash tables, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/07/02
- Re: MPS: weak hash tables, Helmut Eller, 2024/07/02
- Re: MPS: weak hash tables, Gerd Möllmann, 2024/07/03