[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: t and nil in pure memory?
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
Re: t and nil in pure memory? |
Date: |
Thu, 12 Nov 2009 10:22:05 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.50 (gnu/linux) |
>> > The last GC before dumping generates 200K calls to mark_object, of those
>> > 20K have Qt or Qnil as an argument.
>>
>> > Would it make sense to put Qt and Qnil in pure memory?
>>
>> No, because they may contain pointers to objects that aren't in pure
>> memory (via the plist).
> In principle, you could scratch the plist slot from symbols themselves,
> and instead make `symbol-plist' go over an EQ hash-table. (Such
> externalizing of the symbol plist may make more sense in other dialects
> of Lisp where the plist is used less often than in Elisp -- even though
> I'm not aware of any implementation which does.)
Actually, it's even worse than that: (interned) symbols have a `next'
field which points to the next symbol in the obarray (hash) bucket.
So that's yet another reason why (pure)symbols can have pointers to non
pure memory.
Stefan
- t and nil in pure memory?, Dan Nicolaescu, 2009/11/11
- Re: t and nil in pure memory?, Stefan Monnier, 2009/11/11
- Re: t and nil in pure memory?, Tobias C. Rittweiler, 2009/11/12
- Re: t and nil in pure memory?,
Stefan Monnier <=
- Re: t and nil in pure memory?, Dan Nicolaescu, 2009/11/13
- Re: t and nil in pure memory?, Stefan Monnier, 2009/11/13
- Re: t and nil in pure memory?, Richard Stallman, 2009/11/14
- Re: t and nil in pure memory?, David Kastrup, 2009/11/15
- Re: t and nil in pure memory?, Stefan Monnier, 2009/11/15
- Re: t and nil in pure memory?, David Kastrup, 2009/11/16
- Re: t and nil in pure memory?, Richard Stallman, 2009/11/17
- Re: t and nil in pure memory?, Stefan Monnier, 2009/11/17
- Re: t and nil in pure memory?, David Kastrup, 2009/11/17
- Re: t and nil in pure memory?, Richard Stallman, 2009/11/18