From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS4713 221.184.0.0/13 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from neon.ruby-lang.org (neon.ruby-lang.org [221.186.184.75]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACE3E1F42D for ; Wed, 16 May 2018 09:38:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from neon.ruby-lang.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by neon.ruby-lang.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30C911209FB; Wed, 16 May 2018 18:38:18 +0900 (JST) Received: from dcvr.yhbt.net (dcvr.yhbt.net [64.71.152.64]) by neon.ruby-lang.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4265A1209FA for ; Wed, 16 May 2018 18:38:15 +0900 (JST) Received: from localhost (dcvr.yhbt.net [127.0.0.1]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC41F1F42D; Wed, 16 May 2018 09:38:13 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 16 May 2018 09:38:13 +0000 From: Eric Wong To: ruby-core@ruby-lang.org Message-ID: <20180516093813.GB10713@dcvr> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-ML-Name: ruby-core X-Mail-Count: 87076 Subject: [ruby-core:87076] Re: [Ruby trunk Misc#14762] [PATCH] gc.c: use ccan/list X-BeenThere: ruby-core@ruby-lang.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Ruby developers List-Id: Ruby developers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ruby-core-bounces@ruby-lang.org Sender: "ruby-core" ko1@atdot.net wrote: > No strong opinion. > > They are memo: > > I tried to reorder sweeping list by (a) "full page (all slots are living)" and (b)"can sweep page (there are some free-able slots)" and sweep only (b). > No big improvement though :p > > I think using ccan we can move the order, so we can try it later? Yes, ccan/list should make reordering and experimentation simpler. > If we have any trouble to modify them using more complex strategy, we can revert it. > > > Trivial comments: > * The field name `sweep_pos` seems index for me. Maybe > `sweeping_page` or something is fine for me. Right, I think of it as an index to the main ->pages list; so I used '_pos' suffix. I guess `sweeping_page` along with comment clarifying it is a pointer inside ->pages is OK. > * Every time I feel magical for the name `node` (for CCAN > list). Should I endure? (page_node or something is clear, but > verbose I agree). I only wondered about confusion with T_NODE type. I suppose `page_node` is OK, but I prefer shorter names (since I need big fonts)