Re: "avoid running GC when SCM_I_CURRENT_THREAD is unset"

2011-03-30 Thread Neil Jerram
Andy Wingo writes: > Hi Neil! > > Adding guile-devel; I'm wrong a lot lately, and folks should know ;-) > > On Wed 30 Mar 2011 21:11, Neil Jerram writes: > >> I saw this change and couldn't fully understand it. Given that you >> ended up adding GC_disable() and GC_enable() around the GC_malloc(

Re: "avoid running GC when SCM_I_CURRENT_THREAD is unset"

2011-03-30 Thread Andy Wingo
Hi Neil! Adding guile-devel; I'm wrong a lot lately, and folks should know ;-) On Wed 30 Mar 2011 21:11, Neil Jerram writes: > I saw this change and couldn't fully understand it. Given that you > ended up adding GC_disable() and GC_enable() around the GC_malloc() > call, couldn't you just have

[Neil Jerram] "avoid running GC when SCM_I_CURRENT_THREAD is unset"

2011-03-30 Thread Neil Jerram
[sorry, this should of course have been CC'd to the list too...] Hi Andy, I saw this change and couldn't fully understand it. Given that you ended up adding GC_disable() and GC_enable() around the GC_malloc() call, couldn't you just have done that without all the other changes from "t->" to "t."