Re: Stupid pdump+GC suggestion
> > Won't we get something extremely purespace-like, by
> > i) pdumped object are read-only _and have the mark bit set_
> > ii) in phase a and c walk only over the non-pdumped objects?
>
> Given the revised GC description, obviously this won't work.
Sorry but it is not obvious to me at all. Just replace "all" in b. by
"all non-pdumped".
OK.
> In the dumper I was considering, there would
> also have been a `held' bit that would be set for read-write
> objects referenced by a read-only object. Objects with the
> 'held' bit would not be reclaimed by the GC.
Do you think there would be enough such objects around that this is
worth it? (The problem is that you need to treat these held objects as
additional roots).
I think that it will be limited to symbols. We will have to put
the Vuninterned_symbols hash back in or use a 'held' bit. The
Vuninterned_symbols hash table is less expensive.