Newsgroups: perl.perl6.internals
Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!nntp.perl.org
Return-Path: <chroma...@wgz.org>
Mailing-List: contact perl6-internals-h...@perl.org; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list perl6-intern...@perl.org
Received: (qmail 8776 invoked by uid 76); 2 Apr 2004 06:30:42 -0000
Received: from x1.develooper.com (HELO x1.develooper.com) (63.251.223.170)
  by onion.perl.org (qpsmtpd/0.27.1) with SMTP; Thu, 01 Apr 2004 22:30:42 -0800
Received: (qmail 19958 invoked by uid 225); 2 Apr 2004 06:30:34 -0000
Delivered-To: perl6-intern...@perl.org
Received: (qmail 19940 invoked by alias); 2 Apr 2004 06:30:33 -0000
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=7.0
	tests=
X-Spam-Check-By: la.mx.develooper.com
Received: from [63.105.27.240] (HELO snafu.wgz.com) (63.105.27.240)
  by la.mx.develooper.com (qpsmtpd/0.27.1) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Apr 2004 22:30:31 -0800
Received: from localhost (snafu [127.0.0.1])
	by snafu.wgz.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id EA4752338D; Thu,  1 Apr 2004 22:30:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from snafu.wgz.com ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (snafu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP
 id 16609-09; Thu,  1 Apr 2004 22:30:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from chat.yahoo.com (sub27-239.member.dsl-only.net [63.105.27.239])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by snafu.wgz.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 721032333B; Thu,  1 Apr 2004 22:30:29 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: Initializers, finalizers, and fallbacks
To: Dan Sugalski <d...@sidhe.org>
Cc: perl6-intern...@perl.org
In-Reply-To: <a06010205bc6bc09fea71@[10.0.1.2]>
References: <a06010205bc6bc09fea71@[10.0.1.2]>
Content-Type: text/plain
Message-ID: <1080887353.10268.166.camel@localhost>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2004 22:29:14 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at wgz.org
Approved: n...@nntp.perl.org
From: chroma...@wgz.org (Chromatic)

On Wed, 2004-03-03 at 09:39, Dan Sugalski wrote:

> Okay, here's a sketch of where I'm going with the initialization, 
> finalization, and fallback method locating. We need to do this 
> because we're in the semi-unenviable position of supporting multiple 
> languages that do this but that *don't* aggree on method names. So we 
> can't depend on those.
> 
> So, what we're going to do is introduce six properties:
> 
>     FALLBACK
>     CONSTRUCT
>     BUILD
>     FINALIZE
>     DELETE
>     CLEANUP

Suppose I have, for the sake of argument, a pointer to a struct that
comes from an external C library.  In which method under this scheme
would I tell that library to free the memory?

(I'm happy to let global destruction handle that at the moment, but it'd
be nice to release memory I know will go unused.)

-- c