Re: C++ vs. GCPRO

JV> Martin Buchholz <martin(a)xemacs.org&gt; writes: JV> [My first post seems missing from the list. Sorry if you see this twice] JV> Here is something I prepared earlier (ahem). All these structs would JV> be typedef'ed in a real use of course. I think you can do this JV> checking as long as you allow about 6 or so different types that under JV> C would all just be the same thing. JV> g++ -c gcpro.C JV> gcpro.C: In function `void incorrect()': JV> gcpro.C:74: conversion from `rv_lispobj' to non-scalar type `funarg_lispobj' requested This is very interesting. I now agree that something like this would work, and would be useful at least for debugging GCPROs, and might be the way to go for XEmacs production code. One idea for automatic GCPROing: Any Lisp_Object has to live in data, bss, stack, or heap. Presumably this can be detected using configure tests and such. If a Lisp_Object, even a temporary one, is being constructed with an address on the stack, it can simply GCPRO itself. This is a little tricky, since the order of objects allocated and deallocated will not be completely stacklike. When a function returns, the return value will be constructed via a copy constructor, the original value will be destructed afterwards. I think...