Use NULL instead of END_X_QUEUE closures?
fryguybob at gmail.com
Tue May 8 00:52:47 UTC 2018
These are pointed to by objects traversed by GC. They have info tables
like any other heap object that GC can understand. I think this is a much
simpler invariant to hold then to have some heap objects point to NULL.
On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 3:34 PM, Ömer Sinan Ağacan <omeragacan at gmail.com>
> Currently we sometimes use special closures to mark end of lists of
> objects. Some examples:
> - END_TSO_QUEUE
> - END_STM_WATCH_QUEUE
> - END_STM_CHUNK_LIST
> But we also use NULL for the same thing, e.g. in weak pointer lists
> (old_weak_ptr_list, weak_ptr_list).
> I'm wondering why we need special marker objects (which are actual closures
> with info tables) instead of using NULL consistently. Current approach
> causes a
> minor problem when working on the RTS because every time I traverse a list
> need to remember how the list is terminated (e.g. NULL when traversing weak
> pointer lists, END_TSO_QUEUE when traversing TSO lists).
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs at haskell.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ghc-devs