Re: GC vtable method limitations?

2002-05-21 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 3:34 PM -0400 5/20/02, Mike Lambert wrote: At 12:06 AM -0400 5/19/02, Mike Lambert wrote: Is there a plan to make a freed method for when pmc header gets put back onto the free list? (This would require we call this method on all pmc's before moving anything to the freelist, in case

Re: GC vtable method limitations?

2002-05-21 Thread Steve Fink
On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 03:34:27PM -0400, Mike Lambert wrote: Collect's dead, I think. I'm not seeing the point anymore, and since we do collect runs through the buffers and not the PMCs, there's no place to find what needs calling. Well, the hashtable could certainly use it. :) There is

Re: GC vtable method limitations?

2002-05-20 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 12:06 AM -0400 5/19/02, Mike Lambert wrote: Is there a plan to make a freed method for when pmc header gets put back onto the free list? (This would require we call this method on all pmc's before moving anything to the freelist, in case of dependancies between pmcs and buffers) Nope. I don't

Re: GC vtable method limitations?

2002-05-20 Thread Mike Lambert
At 12:06 AM -0400 5/19/02, Mike Lambert wrote: Is there a plan to make a freed method for when pmc header gets put back onto the free list? (This would require we call this method on all pmc's before moving anything to the freelist, in case of dependancies between pmcs and buffers) Nope. I

GC vtable method limitations?

2002-05-18 Thread Mike Lambert
So we're going to support some vtable operations for GC support. We currently have mark, and we're going to have collect. Is there a plan to make a freed method for when pmc header gets put back onto the free list? (This would require we call this method on all pmc's before moving anything to