[Vm-dev] [OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm] 84ccd0: Change any and all sqMakeMemory...Executable... pr...

Eliot Miranda noreply at github.com
Fri Jan 31 18:55:46 UTC 2020

  Branch: refs/heads/Cog
  Home:   https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm
  Commit: 84ccd0aa7a6bc9b3c4182c3810b678fa89d9e834
  Author: Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda at gmail.com>
  Date:   2020-01-31 (Fri, 31 Jan 2020)

  Changed paths:
    M platforms/Cross/vm/sq.h
    M platforms/Mac OS/vm/sqMacMemory.c
    M platforms/iOS/vm/Common/sqMacV2Memory.c
    M platforms/minheadless/unix/sqPlatformSpecific-Unix.h
    M platforms/minheadless/unix/sqUnixMemory.c
    M platforms/minheadless/unix/sqUnixSpurMemory.c
    M platforms/minheadless/windows/sqPlatformSpecific-Win32.h
    M platforms/minheadless/windows/sqWin32Alloc.c
    M platforms/minheadless/windows/sqWin32SpurAlloc.c
    M platforms/unix/vm/sqUnixMemory.c
    M platforms/unix/vm/sqUnixSpurMemory.c
    M platforms/win32/vm/sqWin32Alloc.c
    M platforms/win32/vm/sqWin32SpurAlloc.c

  Log Message:
  Change any and all sqMakeMemory...Executable... prototypes and implementations
to use usqInt for address arguments (sqInt must be used for teh delta arg).
IMO we should use usqInt where it makes sense (our APIs rather than OS APIs).
I'm not interested in supporting 64-bit oops in 32-bit hosts, or 32-bit oops in
64-bit hosts, so I think it safe to assume that usqInt is equiavlent to
usqIntptr_t, & sqInt to sqIntptr_t, and they're shorter.  I'm open to persuasion
so if I'm wrong please correct me (and the source).

More information about the Vm-dev mailing list