[Vm-dev] An idea about better finalization support

[Igor Stasenko]

2009/4/23 Igor Stasenko <siguctua at gmail.com>:
> 2009/4/23 John M McIntosh <johnmci at smalltalkconsulting.com>:
>>
>> Well there was the Ephemerons stuff you can add too
>>
>> http://map.squeak.org/package/fe2a35f5-3f97-431e-8596-58e810aa3c72
>>
>> ian had a version he pushed out a couple of years, back which was retracted
>> because it
>> caused VM crashs, but later was proven to be an off by 1 C/slang coding
>> error.
>> But no-one I think had the courage to inflict back onto the community.
>>
>>
>> Er so how would compatibilty work with this new way given an image which may
>> or may not include image side companion code.
>>
>
> I presume this is a question?
> If image don't have a class in special objects array, which should
> represent a class for such kind of weak references, then it will never
> get into that code, because
> (oop class isKindOf: nil "== WeakReferenceWithNotification ") will
> always be false.
> So, VM+image will behave exactly as in older versions of VM.
>

Things not so bright, if you run an image which expecting new
semantics on VMs which don't supports it.
Then it could use a fallback version of code (and handle things in a
way, how it currently done). It then will need to check if new
capability is available or not at image startup phase.

>>
>> --
>> ===========================================================================
>> John M. McIntosh <johnmci at smalltalkconsulting.com>
>> Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd.  http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com
>> ===========================================================================
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
>



-- 
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.