Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 15:08:32 +0200
To: Olivier Andrieu <andrieu at ijm.jussieu.fr>
Cc: Sven Luther <sven.luther at wanadoo.fr>, lablgtk at kaba.or.jp
Subject: Re: Memory handling bug: cannot access fields in a combo box belonging to a dialog which has been destroyed
Message-ID: <20030917130832.GA7523 at iliana>
References: <20030916103137.GA25181 at redhat.com> <16231.2269.152007.823440 at karryall.dnsalias.org> <20030916162604.GA30706 at redhat.com> <20030917071141A.garrigue at kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp> <20030917080141.GA2325 at iliana> <16232.13115.936897.972444 at akasha.ijm.jussieu.fr> <20030917101503.GA6265 at iliana> <16232.22901.52195.482854 at akasha.ijm.jussieu.fr>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <16232.22901.52195.482854 at akasha.ijm.jussieu.fr>
From: Sven Luther <sven.luther at wanadoo.fr>

On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 02:54:13PM +0200, Olivier Andrieu wrote:
>  Sven Luther [Wednesday 17 September 2003] :
>  > > Objects that appear on the caml side have an extra reference, so they
>  > > are not GTK-finalized when they are destroyed, but later, when they
>  > > are caml-finalized.
>  > 
>  > Err, so a destroyed object would have a refcount of 1 ?
> 
> Yes, but the converse is not true.

For object not created by ocaml but created indirectly, right ? Does
this matter ? Do we even have access to such objects, as they are not GC
roots or something such ? I guess we have access to them indirectly, but
then the ocaml binding giving us access to them should also increment
ref counter or something such, no ?

Friendly,

Sven Luther