From: Ara.T.Howard@...
Date: 2005-05-17T12:30:30+09:00
Subject: Re: rb_gc_mark question

On Tue, 17 May 2005, Nakada, Nobuyoshi wrote:

> Hi,
>
> At Tue, 17 May 2005 09:30:31 +0900,
> Ara.T.Howard@noaa.gov wrote in [ruby-talk:142861]:
>>> GC may run while resizing rows, however many platforms don't
>>> have the problem.  And rb_gc_mark() isn't sufficient in theory
>>> but volatile with currow avoids it, so rb_gc_mark() isn't
>>> needed here at all.
>>
>> why does it matter if the GC runs while re-sizing rows?  it seems like rows
>> would still have references to all the old rows and the new one would be
>> added?  or are you saying that, without volatile currow could get gc'd when
>> rows got resized?  i guess i can see that.  still how would volatile help
>> that?
>
> I forgot that it was an already fixed bug on platforms passing
> arguments by regsiters.

thanks nobu - this is good to know.

>>> Therefore volatile before rval is better than rb_gc_mark() also
>>> here.
>>
>> you are saying ONLY volatile and no rb_gc_mark then?
>
> So you don't need volatile neither rb_gc_mak() with recent versions of ruby
> even on such platforms.

o.k. - that's great because i already stripped them ;-)

cheers.

-a
-- 
===============================================================================
| email :: ara [dot] t [dot] howard [at] noaa [dot] gov
| phone :: 303.497.6469
| renunciation is not getting rid of the things of this world, but accepting
| that they pass away. --aitken roshi
===============================================================================