Re: missing GC protection in Fbyte_code

[Stefan Monnier]

>     As far as I can tell, all the cases in Fbyte_code that call
>     record_unwind_protect should protect against GC like the
>     Bunwind_protect case.  I don't know why we missed that originally.

> The comment is wrong: record_unwind_protect cannot GC.
> So I think the right change is to delete the gc protect
> stuff from the Bunwind_protect case.

> Stefan was the last one to change that code.  Maybe the old
> record_unwind_protect could GC in the past, but not now.  Stefan, is
> that what happened?

Actually, this particular change (to add the GC thingy and the comment)
comes from Gerd:

   revision 1.54
   date: 2000/11/21 16:47:04;  author: gerd;  state: Exp;  lines: +6 -0
   (Fbyte_code) <Bvarbind, Bunwind_protect>: Add
   BEFORE/AFTER_POTENTIAL_GC.

The comment for Bvarbind is a bit more explicit and mentions that it's
because the code can call Fsignal which itself can GC.  I think the reason
why it can GC is because of Vsignal_hook_function (used by edebug).


        Stefan