Yes of course. Thanks for the precision So all old object that point to a young object should be in the root table. If one of the old object pointing to the young space aren't in the root table the vm will probably soon crash. Is it true?
On Nov 19, 2007, at 7:34 PM, tim Rowledge wrote:
On 19-Nov-07, at 10:23 AM, Mathieu Suen wrote:
Ok so IIRC adding object into the root table that do not contain young object do not bug the system.
True - we hope!
but every object that contain young object should be inside this table otherwise the gc crash?
Not quite - *old* objects that probably contain young objects need to be in the list, which the beRootIfOld: code should hopefully make clear. Young objects don't need to be in the root table because they get scanned anyway.
tim
tim Rowledge; tim@rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim "How many Pak Protectors does it take to change a lightbulb?" "Only one, but the lightbulb has to smell right."
Mth