Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2006 14:07:35 +0900 (JST)
Message-Id: <20060908.140735.88448321.garrigue at math.nagoya-u.ac.jp>
To: robertr at rftp.com
Cc: lablgtk at math.nagoya-u.ac.jp
Subject: Re: CVS vs "2.6.0" snapshot
From: Jacques Garrigue <garrigue at math.nagoya-u.ac.jp>
In-Reply-To: <4500E708.2090704 at rftp.com>
References: <4500E708.2090704 at rftp.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Length: 1318

From: Robert Roessler <robertr at rftp.com>

> I have a few questions vis the current CVS version:
> 
> 1) is a new snapshot/release imminent?

No new release immediately, but a snapshot is easy.
Since there are no planned modifications, yours could be made
official.
(Or rather, I will checkout a snapshot for the same date.)

> 2) are there known stability (or other) issues with the current CVS?

Nothing I know.

> 3) not to offend by mangling the French language, but could someone 
> comment on the "raison de etre" for each of the recent checkins 
> identified by "delay finalization" and "absvalue"? :)

The first one corrects a bad bug in lablgtk up to 2.6.0, which could
call some callback during finalization. This is clearly prohibited by
the GC specification, so this is no surprise that it can cause
segfaults. Now callbacks are put into a timeout, so they will be called
by the gtk mainloop sometime later.

The second change is mostly esthetical. Since I had reports that in
the past lablgtk bindings contained bugs where Val_int or Int_val were
forgotten/interverted, I tried to see how the ocaml headers could be
made a bit more abstract, to prevent this kind of errors. These are
non-standard headers, and they are intended only for debugging lablgtk
itself. I didn't find any new bug yet...

Jacques