[M3devel] HEADS UP: Release engineering, was: Re: CM3 Release

[Mika Nystrom]

I agree with what Hendrik says, but what about TYPECASE, ISTYPE,
NARROW?  Those are necessary to make it possible to pass "pointers"
with the low-order bit set outside of unsafe code.

My feeling is that if Tony can make the necessary changes, it could
be done immediately, and the language issues can be pushed to the
future.  But admittedly I'm biased because of the application I'm
working on.

I need to get a recent CM3 up to test the TEXTs.... are they the
default now?

     Mika

hendrik at topoi.pooq.com writes:
>On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 12:02:17PM +0200, Olaf Wagner wrote:
>> If anybody could test Rodney's TEXT changes and provide some
>> information on the impacts on our applications, that would help a lot.
>> 
>> I also wasn't able to read and understand all the mails about small objects.
>> (Guessing, I'd say I'd need another day for that :-)
>> Can anybody summarize?
>> Has a conclusion been reached and what will be done/implemented?
>> Is this relevant for the next release, or will it take longer?
>
>Deciding that the garbage collector should test for the low-order bit of 
>pointers and leave them alone if the bit is set could probably dop done 
>immediately, and would make it possible for users to build unsafe code 
>to do the small-objects stuff.  This could go in the next release if 
>the garbage-collector change wom't upset anything.
>
>There's still some discussion about just what form the final language 
>feature should take.  I don't know if that will be finished in time for 
>the release.
>
>-- hendrik
>