On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Jonathan S. Shapiro <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 7:43 PM, Ben Kloosterman <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Taking a step back I dont see how life time is becomes an issue just by >> changing an interface from a reference type to a value type . >> > > Simple. A reference type, ultimately, cannot be stack allocated. It is > always correct to simply migrate the reference type into the general GC > heap (i.e. the oldest region). Value types can be stack allocated. Along > with that comes hard region bounds. > I dont see an issue for the interface being value typed and on the stack its no diffirent to nay other value type holding a reference. > >> For interfaces to objects an interface cant outlive an object when the >> interface holds a "reference" to it . They will always be collected ( >> whether stack frame , region of GC) together or interface then object. >> > > For an interface to a stack allocated value type, this is not correct. > Yep . I said that later but it doesnt answer the question whether interfaces should refer to stack allocated value types . What else does that introduce ? Ben
_______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
