On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 09:39:18AM +0200, Holger Hans Peter Freyther wrote:
> hi,

> I've looked at this code for a bit and I wonder why we don't inhibit the
> process switching here? Or at least add a way to crash hard if a process
> change is scheduled so I can see which mutex is hit.

I have hit the wesp nest here. So GtkImage of VisualGST is adding various
"Processor activeProcess yield" into for loops as otherwise we get issues
with the garbage collector:

...scripts/Test.st:181: Too many garbage collections, finalizers missed!
...scripts/Test.st:181: This is a bug, please repor

Couldn't we copy the content of gcArray to a new array? Or run the
finalizer at another point?

holger

_______________________________________________
help-smalltalk mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-smalltalk

Reply via email to