Thanks for the response. > >Instead, is it not possible to just increment the reference count > >of every variable by overloading its clone method. The destructor > >can then reduce the reference count. I don't know > >enough about cloning to figure out if this will work yet. Perhaps > >the issue is whether tied variables can be shared? > > I'm not sure I understand what the problem is here or what you're > trying to achieve or point out. Could you elaborate? >
Ok, let me start with a question instead - is it possible for two instances of the interpreter to hold one reference each to a variable? If this is possible, then it must be possible to implement shared variables by just housing them in a special interpreter instance and incrementing reference count every time a clone is done. Is this how it is really implemented? Next how is scoping implemented for shared variables - how does the 'special interpreter' where shared variables live know what stash to fetch the variable from? I could not figure this from the code. Thanks, Arvind
