Re: [Gc] Re: [bdwgc] Export mark-bit manipulation functions. (9d07ead)

Ivan Maidanski ivmai at mail.ru
Mon Jan 16 23:17:03 PST 2012


Hi Petter,

The only argument against could be source incompatibility in case some one gets address of such a function.

GC_finalized_malloc - is a new function so it's ok to change.
GC_[debug_]end_change_stubborn - are unimplemented, so not used (really no sense to change but could do).
static roots manipulation - wizards only (lets leave their API as is).

Regards.

17 01 2012, 01:31 Petter Urkedal <urkedal at nbi.dk>:
> It seems reasonable to me.  Let me CC to the mailing list in case
> someone can think of an argument why these functions should to take a
> constant pointer arguments.
> 
> On 2012-01-16, Ivan Maidanski wrote:
> > There exists some other candidates for constantization: GC_[debug_]end_change_stubborn, GC_exclude_static_roots, GC_add/remove_roots, GC_general_register_disappearing_link(const obj), GC_finalized_malloc. Correct?
> >
> > ---
> > Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
> > https://github.com/paurkedal/bdwgc/commit/9d07ead2d0bc217a3ded434372952f7a8db6c17a#commitcomment-871027
> _______________________________________________
> Gc mailing list
> Gc at linux.hpl.hp.com
> http://www.hpl.hp.com/hosted/linux/mail-archives/gc/
> 



More information about the Gc mailing list