Re: Memory management practices

diff --git a/89/630c0b704aa7167f9ce97c67978dad0bc55f46 b/89/630c0b704aa7167f9ce97c67978dad0bc55f46
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..a5df7f0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/89/630c0b704aa7167f9ce97c67978dad0bc55f46
@@ -0,0 +1,110 @@
+Return-Path: <Sebastian@SSpaeth.de>\r
+X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8962A429E26\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Thu,  8 Sep 2011 06:50:30 -0700 (PDT)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: -0.09\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5\r
+       tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1,\r
+       RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_MIME_NO_TEXT=0.01] autolearn=disabled\r
+Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])\r
+       by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)\r
+       with ESMTP id b6YpQ80ylyYh for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+       Thu,  8 Sep 2011 06:50:30 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from homiemail-a18.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdccac.dreamhost.com\r
+       [208.97.132.202])\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0370C431FB6\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Thu,  8 Sep 2011 06:50:29 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from homiemail-a18.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
+       by homiemail-a18.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E1A6250069;\r
+       Thu,  8 Sep 2011 06:50:29 -0700 (PDT)\r
+DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=SSpaeth.de; h=from:to:cc:subject\r
+       :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version:\r
+       content-type; q=dns; s=sspaeth.de; b=m4ssej0/PwwXeew+3uWJC5+c27T\r
+       knK5Otm2iqNWGWWjw3IzPOrOkCQ8cnB7N+MUowBjr8f5edUQZRf37IzDuedKT9nA\r
+       PnmFNnUp9YZ9U1UJWCnXi36/gmTUa1b1zZ9c2j4CHhwAM8LuidTjDXCbLr+ODbcs\r
+       V0xK0aDN9qdAgYEQ=\r
+DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=SSpaeth.de; h=from:to:cc\r
+       :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version:\r
+       content-type; s=sspaeth.de; bh=haccxn3IsQ9GSf/sKQC9XPVTmmA=; b=F\r
+       7nond65cqEtBDnr8Kcir4BHMvKHRZUtojhdFHtt3dcsbWvGF96izXe/R3L5CpYuz\r
+       gbJ7yklrp2DeKu81F4vj8eGoHf+kwuSJ9enwx1vrl4paXORcoPxiwrgKpN/zUBI5\r
+       UqajEgtvn5xPkML5X5lk6h5XfTGzTvCbIu+XSsvGvY=\r
+Received: from spaetzbook.sspaeth.de (mtec-hg-docking-1-dhcp-21.ethz.ch\r
+       [129.132.133.21])\r
+       (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits))\r
+       (No client certificate requested)\r
+       (Authenticated sender: fax@sspaeth.de)\r
+       by homiemail-a18.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 223CC250065; \r
+       Thu,  8 Sep 2011 06:50:26 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: by spaetzbook.sspaeth.de (sSMTP sendmail emulation);\r
+       Thu, 08 Sep 2011 15:50:25 +0200\r
+From: Sebastian Spaeth <Sebastian@SSpaeth.de>\r
+To: Austin Clements <amdragon@mit.edu>, Ben Gamari <bgamari.foss@gmail.com>\r
+Subject: Re: Memory management practices\r
+In-Reply-To:\r
+ <CAH-f9WveBfvmv2jOF+C81OeeQJt06g6U0q3J_idHrs60DLw7+g@mail.gmail.com>\r
+References: <8739h1pbaq.fsf@gmail.com> <87pqjprzu2.fsf@gmail.com>\r
+       <20110829183010.GA2605@24f89f8c-e6a1-4e75-85ee-bb8a3743bb9f>\r
+       <87liucyn7i.fsf@gmail.com> <87aaag3xaf.fsf@gmail.com>\r
+       <CAH-f9WsfHUm_D-+wB89Lt9Wt=hjwDyywvJTK-0NwmHRg0TUsxQ@mail.gmail.com>\r
+       <CAH-f9WveBfvmv2jOF+C81OeeQJt06g6U0q3J_idHrs60DLw7+g@mail.gmail.com>\r
+User-Agent: Notmuch/0.7-19-gee4579a (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.2.1\r
+       (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)\r
+Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2011 15:50:24 +0200\r
+Message-ID: <87zkiff8in.fsf@SSpaeth.de>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";\r
+       micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"\r
+Cc: Bertram Felgenhauer <bertram.felgenhauer@googlemail.com>,\r
+       notmuch <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>, Bart Massey <bart@cs.pdx.edu>\r
+X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13\r
+Precedence: list\r
+List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."\r
+       <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>\r
+List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>\r
+List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>\r
+List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>\r
+X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2011 13:50:30 -0000\r
+\r
+--=-=-=\r
+\r
+On Wed, 7 Sep 2011 23:05:19 -0400, Austin Clements <amdragon@mit.edu> wrote:\r
+> Sorry, I went back and re-read your earlier messages and now I see why\r
+> your references were the way they were.  I stand by the rest of my\r
+> previous message though.  I think the technique used in the Python\r
+> bindings only works because Python's GC happens to finalize in a\r
+> particular order (though I doubt that's guaranteed, and could easily\r
+> not be the case if you stray into the realm of its cycle collector).\r
+> In general, it seems like approach is trying to recreate C-like memory\r
+> management and is fragile as a result, whereas talloc should, I think,\r
+> allow bindings to express their runtime's memory management rather\r
+> naturally.\r
+\r
+Mmmh? Why would the method in python be fragile? Each message object\r
+holds a reference to its parent query object to keep it alive. Are you\r
+saying cycle collectors could kill off the query object nonetheless?\r
+(Assume that I know nothing of GCs which comes close to reality)\r
+\r
+Sebastian\r
+\r
+--=-=-=\r
+Content-Type: application/pgp-signature\r
+\r
+-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----\r
+Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)\r
+\r
+iEYEARECAAYFAk5oyCEACgkQVYX1jMgnoGL4YACfYYOJpDynWIXlLPN7cO0nPnLB\r
+jXAAnjiiuIq50cd7qRRuwip397rYglf/\r
+=5mbq\r
+-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----\r
+--=-=-=--\r