PROTECT and OCaml GC.

Whit Armstrong a ?crit :
I've had success w/ using a reference counting paradigm in which the outside
memory manager calls UNPROTECT_PTR(R_object_); in its destructor.
So, in my case (using c++ ) if objects are allocated on the heap, which
allocate R objects as their backend storage, I don't have to worry about out
of order UNPROTECT calls b/c UNPROTECT_PTR will just put the objects that
c++ destroys on the gc list.
If you are using c as the glue for all your ocaml bindings, they you may
want to have a look at this:
http://github.com/armstrtw/rabstraction
Or the in progress re-write here: http://github.com/armstrtw/RObjects
-Whit
Thanks a lot for these pointers.

UNPROTECT_PTR seems quite interesting. As I understand it, it avoids caring about protecting and unprotecting in the order the stacks would expect. This is quite interesting, since I'd like to keep OCaml's GC to do housekeeping, and not rely on referencing counting.

FWIW what I think you should be really looking at is R_PreserveObject/R_ReleaseObject. I would suggest looking at the many other R embeddings in other languages that already exist since I don't think you approach is very viable (but I think I expressed that already before).

Cheers,
Simon
I'm using C as the glue, but I want it to be as thin as possible. I will probably not do reference counting in C, for instance. Nevertheless, there's obviously good ideas in rabstraction/RObjects that I'll adapt.

Thanks a lot.

-- 
    Guillaume Yziquel
http://yziquel.homelinux.org/

______________________________________________
R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel

PROTECT and OCaml GC.

Thread (12 messages)