[Patches] GC patch 3 and 4

[Neil Schemenauer]

On Thu, Jun 29, 2000 at 05:20:35AM +0200, Vladimir Marangozov wrote:
> Neil Schemenauer wrote:
> > The major problem I see with the current API is that PyObject_NEW
> > and PyObject_DEL are not symmetric.  When GC is enabled
> > PyObject_NEW returns an object pointer while PyObject_DEL takes a
> > GC pointer.
> 
> I see. Would it make sense for PyObject_NEW to return the GC pointer ?
> (only if the object type supports GC).

I would say that's a step in the wrong direction.  Since the
PyObject_Init code has to access the object structure two
conversions would have to be done.  Also, I don't like that part
of the implementation leaking out.  If PyObject_DEL could be made
a statement instead of an expression then something like:

    #ifdef WITH_CYCLE_GC 
    #define PyObject_DEL(op) do { \
            if (PyObject_IS_GC(op)) { \
                PyObject_FREE(PyObject_AS_GC(op)); \
            } else { \
                PyObject_FREE(op); \
            } \
            } while (0);
    #else
    #define PyObject_DEL(op) PyObject_FREE(op)
    #endif

would do the trick.  The PyObject_AS_GC garbage in types could
then be dropped.  A quick look at the code indicates that
PyObject_DEL as a statement would be okay for the types
supporting GC.  Could this work?  Is it a good idea?

  Neil