Re: missing GC protection in Fbyte_code

[Dave Love]

Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:

> If it is really necessary to gcpro because you call a function that
> calls Fsignal, we would need to add lots of gcpros all around.

This isn't gcpro in the normal sense.  The macros involved deal with
the bytecode stack, not data on the C stack.  It's been several years,
though, and I don't remember details.

[It's a pity normal gcpro hasn't been eliminated yet.  I doubt there
are interesting platforms where it can't be done straightforwardly.]