[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Scheme-reports] Scheme-reports Digest, Vol 10, Issue 1
| Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 18:02:59 -0400
| From: "Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@x>
|
| Nonetheless, how would file descriptors being visible inherently
| lead to leaks?
If the way you refer to file-descriptors is by number, then there is
no way for the garbage collector to prove that a file-descriptor is no
longer in use.
If the garbage collector can't reclaim file-descriptors, then it
becomes the programmer's responsibility to close file-descriptors it
no longer uses. Exceptions or programmer oversights result in leaked
file-descriptors.
_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@x
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
- References:
- Re: [Scheme-reports] Scheme-reports Digest, Vol 10, Issue 1
- From: "Larry D. Lee jr." <llee@x>
- Re: [Scheme-reports] Scheme-reports Digest, Vol 10, Issue 1
- From: "Thomas Bushnell, BSG" <tb@x>
- Re: [Scheme-reports] Scheme-reports Digest, Vol 10, Issue 1
- From: John Cowan <cowan@x>
- Re: [Scheme-reports] Scheme-reports Digest, Vol 10, Issue 1
- From: Aubrey Jaffer <agj@x>
- Re: [Scheme-reports] Scheme-reports Digest, Vol 10, Issue 1
- From: John Cowan <cowan@x>
- Re: [Scheme-reports] Scheme-reports Digest, Vol 10, Issue 1
- From: "Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@x>