RFC: add finalize function
#9255
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Really nice! |
|
Ah, this is nice. @Sean1708, looks like this is our solution to this line of code. |
| assert(ff != HT_NOTFOUND); | ||
| ptrhash_remove(&finalizer_table, o); | ||
| run_finalizer((jl_value_t*)o, ff); | ||
| int ok = finalize_object(o); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
needs explicit cast for msvc / compiling in C++ mode
int ok = finalize_object((jl_value_t*) o);
otherwise, do want. 👍
|
Ok, not seeing a whole lot of push-back here :) |
JeffBezanson
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 6, 2014
RFC: add `finalize` function
|
@quinnj I'm not sure. Unless I've misunderstood something, this calls any finalizers assigned to a particular object which isn't quite what we need. |
Merged
|
Is there any kind of |
|
Only as a no-op, I think. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Should be self-explanatory.