Re: Exposing common type wrapping/unwrapping methods

[Marius Vollmer]

Ken Raeburn <address@hidden> writes:

> This reminds me... was there ever a decision on the "call malloc and
> free from the same object on Windows" issue?

My decision at that time was that we assume that there is only one
malloc and one free.

> Basically, malloc and free referenced from a DLL, say libguile.dll,
> may be different instances of the functions than the application or
> other DLLs might see, and they should thus be assumed to have
> different allocation pools that can't be mixed.

Is this merely technically possible or are people actually using this
'feature'?  Is it considered a godd practice?  Why should we agree?

Can we require libguile.dll to use the systems libc malloc and free?
We could put this in the documentation then so that people know which
variant of malloc and free to use together with libguile.dll.

-- 
GPG: D5D4E405 - 2F9B BCCC 8527 692A 04E3  331E FAF8 226A D5D4 E405