Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2009 21:49:38 -0800 From: Chris Hanson <c...@chris-hanson.org>
I agree with most of your analysis. OK, I'll start making the changes. *** xml/xml-names.scm This is hairy: part of it looks like it needs to be datum-weak, but we don't have that now. But someone more familiar with the XML name abstraction should review this. **************** All three tables should be weak. Making them weak will do nothing, actually, because every datum in them has a strong reference to its key. These want to be datum-weak hash tables, not key-weak hash tables. So I think that for now, since we don't have datum-weak hash tables, these should all be strong, perhaps with a comment about what the state of affairs should be. _______________________________________________ MIT-Scheme-devel mailing list MIT-Scheme-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/mit-scheme-devel
