"David L. Nicol" wrote:
i'm swearing off sort-by-subject. Sorry.
Damien Neil wrote:
>
> sub foo {
> my Dog $spot = shift;
> my $fh = IO::File->new("file");
> $spot->eat_homework($fh);
> }
>
> Even with the object type declared, the compiler can make no
> assumptions about whether a reference to $fh will be held or not.
> Perhaps the Poodle sub
Damien Neil wrote:
DN> {
DN>my $fh = IO::File->new("file");
DN>do_stuff($fh);
DN> }
DN>
DN> sub do_stuff { ... }
Simon Cozens wrote:
SC> No, it can't, but it can certainly put a *test* for not having
SC> references there.
Dan Sugalski wrote:
DS> Yes it can tell, actually--we do have the
OTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 12:29 PM
Subject: Re: Please shoot down this GC idea...
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 03:04:40PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > At 05:57 PM 2/14/2001 -0300, Branden wrote:
> > >Simon Cozens
On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 03:38:55PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 08:29 PM 2/14/2001 +, Graham Barr wrote:
> >On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 03:04:40PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > > At 05:57 PM 2/14/2001 -0300, Branden wrote:
> > > >Simon Cozens wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 11:38:58AM
On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 03:04:40PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 05:57 PM 2/14/2001 -0300, Branden wrote:
> >Simon Cozens wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 11:38:58AM -0800, Damien Neil wrote:
> > > > sub do_stuff { ... }
> > > >
> > > > {
> > > > my $fh = IO::File->new("file");
> > >
At 08:59 PM 2/14/2001 +, Graham Barr wrote:
>On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 03:38:55PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > At 08:29 PM 2/14/2001 +, Graham Barr wrote:
> > >On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 03:04:40PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > > > At 05:57 PM 2/14/2001 -0300, Branden wrote:
> > > > >Simon C
On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 03:04:40PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> Yes it can tell, actually--we do have the full bytecode to the sub
> available to us, along with whatever metainfo we choose to remember
> generally about the sub. Whether we use the info is a separate matter, of
> course.
What ab
At 08:29 PM 2/14/2001 +, Graham Barr wrote:
>On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 03:04:40PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > At 05:57 PM 2/14/2001 -0300, Branden wrote:
> > >Simon Cozens wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 11:38:58AM -0800, Damien Neil wrote:
> > > > > sub do_stuff { ... }
> > > > >
>
At 05:57 PM 2/14/2001 -0300, Branden wrote:
>Simon Cozens wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 11:38:58AM -0800, Damien Neil wrote:
> > > sub do_stuff { ... }
> > >
> > > {
> > > my $fh = IO::File->new("file");
> > > do_stuff($fh);
> > > }
> > >
> > > In this code, the compiler can det
Simon Cozens wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 11:38:58AM -0800, Damien Neil wrote:
> > sub do_stuff { ... }
> >
> > {
> > my $fh = IO::File->new("file");
> > do_stuff($fh);
> > }
> >
> > In this code, the compiler can determine that $fh has no active
> > references at the end of the
On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 11:38:58AM -0800, Damien Neil wrote:
> sub do_stuff { ... }
>
> {
> my $fh = IO::File->new("file");
> do_stuff($fh);
> }
>
> In this code, the compiler can determine that $fh has no active
> references at the end of the block
No, it can't, but it can certai
On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 11:26:00AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 11:03 AM 2/14/2001 -0500, Buddha Buck wrote:
> [Truly profound amount of snippage]
> >I'm sure this idea has flaws. But it's an idea. Tell me what I'm missing.
>
> You've pretty much summed up the current plan.
I have a strong
At 11:03 AM 2/14/2001 -0500, Buddha Buck wrote:
[Truly profound amount of snippage]
>I'm sure this idea has flaws. But it's an idea. Tell me what I'm missing.
You've pretty much summed up the current plan.
Dan
--"it's
Why won't this work:
As I see it, we can't guarantee that DESTROYable objects will be DESTROYed
immediately when they become garbage without a full ref-counting scheme. A
full ref-counting scheme is potentially expensive.
Even full ref-counting schemes can't guarantee proper and timely
destr
15 matches
Mail list logo
