Antony Courtney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote,
You indicated that you were somewhat unclear why we need liveness
dependencies. I'll attempt to clarify by sketching some of the details
of the particular C library for which I am writing FFI wrappers.
I have a C library for 2D vector graphics.
22 Oct 2002 01:32:55 +0100, Alastair Reid [EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
-- keepAlive x y ensures that the finalizer for y is not run
-- until after the finalizer for x has run to completion.
What if I do keepAlive p1 p2 keepAlive p2 p1?
They will never be collected?
--
__( Marcin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
keepAlive x y ensures that the finalizer for y is not run
until after the finalizer for x has run to completion.
Marcin:
What if I do keepAlive p1 p2 keepAlive p2 p1? They will never be
collected?
Correct.
I'm a bit vague about what liveness dependencies are
John Meacham [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
here are my canidate suggestions:
* add a subset of Weak pointers
Can you spell this out in detail. What are the functions? What are
their semantics?
- or -
* add addForeignDependency :: ForeignPtr a - ForeignPtr b - IO ()
Again, could you spell
Hi Alastair,
Thanks for the concise summary of the problem raised by shared thunks,
and for the keepAlive proposal.
[btw will you be in New Haven around 16-19 Nov? I'm going to swing
through there on my next trip over and it'd be good to see you and
maybe ever humiliate myself again in the
Simon Marlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ok, I'm sad to say that the problem we recently uncovered to do with
finalizers sharing values with the rest of the program essentially kills
off the possibility of doing Haskell finalizers in systems without
proper concurrency support.
Well, I'm not
Ok, I'm sad to say that the problem we recently uncovered to do with
finalizers sharing values with the rest of the program essentially kills
off the possibility of doing Haskell finalizers in systems without
proper concurrency support. I'm rather embarassed that I didn't notice
this before;
Hi,
I have only been watching this Haskell finalizers discussion from a
great distance, but I am keenly interested in the outcome, as it will
require a significant overhaul of some of my own FFI-based library code.
(My code currently uses touchForeignPtr in a Haskell finalizer to
express a
I also need the touchForeignPtr trick in much of my code. we need to
come up with a replacement if we dont have haskell finalizers. here are
my canidate suggestions:
* add a subset of Weak pointers (or some subset of their functionality)
to the FFI spec. just get rid of the finalizer capability
