[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: MPS: struct window, prev_buffers + next_buffers
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: MPS: struct window, prev_buffers + next_buffers |
Date: |
Sat, 22 Jun 2024 12:50:28 +0300 |
> From: Gerd Möllmann <gerd.moellmann@gmail.com>
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, eller.helmut@gmail.com
> Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2024 10:53:57 +0200
>
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>
> >> But it won't be GC'd anyway, becuase it's marked. And if the buffer in
> >> the cons is killed, it remains in the list. That makes no sense to me.
> >
> > But the code doesn't GC buffers, it just removes them from the
> > prev_buffers and next_buffers lists. If a cons cell of the list is
> > marked, removing the buffer (which could subsequently lead to GC'ing
> > the buffer) might not be expected by the code which uses data that
> > references that buffer, even though the buffer is killed.
>
> You mean the possible change to the cdr of the cons cell could affect
> the client? Hm, that could be the reason. Thanks.
>
> I think I'll try to let window-{next,prev}-buffers clean the list
> before returning it. It doesn't look like something to me that a weak
> vector or something like that could solve. WDYT?
That would work, but what if these functions are not called for a
while?
Also, it would make these simple accessors more expensive.
- MPS: struct window, prev_buffers + next_buffers, Gerd Möllmann, 2024/06/22
- Re: MPS: struct window, prev_buffers + next_buffers, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/06/22
- Re: MPS: struct window, prev_buffers + next_buffers, Gerd Möllmann, 2024/06/22
- Re: MPS: struct window, prev_buffers + next_buffers, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/06/22
- Re: MPS: struct window, prev_buffers + next_buffers, Gerd Möllmann, 2024/06/22
- Re: MPS: struct window, prev_buffers + next_buffers,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: MPS: struct window, prev_buffers + next_buffers, Gerd Möllmann, 2024/06/22