[Fwd: Re: Keeping oops across primitives]
andreas.raab at gmx.de
Thu Jun 8 19:33:30 UTC 2006
Oops, I sent this accidentally only to Bryce...
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Keeping oops across primitives
Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2006 10:50:54 -0700
From: Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de>
To: Bryce Kampjes <bryce at kampjes.demon.co.uk>
References: <4484D055.8020603 at gmx.de>
<17543.20996.659703.227330 at localhost.localdomain>
Hi Bryce -
> > Question: Does anyone see a serious problem with the above proposal? I'm
> > about to implement this right away so if you see an issue with it,
> > please let me know.
> Your solution sounds fine. I'd prefer to be able to register variables
> as roots rather than having to place things in arrays for my use. But
> then I'm just tracking entry points rather than individual objects (a
> dictionary that maps classes and selectors to natively compiled
> methods and an array of objects so natively compiled code can access
Actually, this is an interesting thought. I have the need for managing a
dynamic array of roots but this could be handled just as easily by
tracking a variable pointing to a Squeak array.
So, does anyone feel strongly about going either way?
More information about the Vm-dev