From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net>
X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83])
	by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6C407EE99
	for <caml-list@sympa.inria.fr>; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 14:01:49 +0100 (CET)
Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net) identity=pra;
  client-ip=62.113.205.31;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net";
  x-sender="edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: Pass (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: domain of
  edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net designates 62.113.205.31 as
  permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=62.113.205.31;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net";
  x-sender="edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1"
Received-SPF: Pass (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: domain of
  postmaster@mx.etorok.net designates 62.113.205.31 as
  permitted sender) identity=helo; client-ip=62.113.205.31;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net";
  x-sender="postmaster@mx.etorok.net";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1"
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgoFAJFhqFI+cc0f/2dsb2JhbABZgwe6NoEgFnSCJQEBBAFAOg8LGAkTEg8CRhMIAod4CrEShFiLdREGjw8WhB6YGIpLh0iDKzo
X-IPAS-Result: AgoFAJFhqFI+cc0f/2dsb2JhbABZgwe6NoEgFnSCJQEBBAFAOg8LGAkTEg8CRhMIAod4CrEShFiLdREGjw8WhB6YGIpLh0iDKzo
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,871,1378850400"; 
   d="scan'208";a="48300800"
Received: from mx.etorok.net ([62.113.205.31])
  by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 11 Dec 2013 14:01:48 +0100
Received: by mx.etorok.net (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id e3026495;
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2013 15:01:45 +0200 (EET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=etorok.net; h=
	message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:references:in-reply-to
	:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=ml; l=1027; bh=SOT0No
	DrMVtGuOP4QsCHMCSO5cI=; b=O1ALmKJrdyu3DNXUEw0k/E6LZ0lC3zEjuxRT03
	M8i+tYSBfJqLbBjXKXRTzdwfSR97rYTyP0PHTBzP7WxgURbwJgES0Sp6SPt9OpE/
	2lPFGflLVzK7gQnWprcI3uCbLzDpbOldlf/e3T7shQaPGej8pi3aHd7jpDQR0XIr
	BxV74=
Received: by mx.etorok.net (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id cf79c79c;
	TLS version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO;
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2013 15:01:45 +0200 (EET)
Message-ID: <52A86239.30107@etorok.net>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 15:01:45 +0200
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?T=F6r=F6k_Edwin?= <edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20131103 Icedove/17.0.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: caml-list@inria.fr
References: <52A8508D.2050000@inria.fr>
In-Reply-To: <52A8508D.2050000@inria.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Mismatch between Gc.full_major() documentation and
 behaviour

On 12/11/2013 01:46 PM, Bertrand Jeannet wrote:
> According to the documentation, the sequence
> "Gc.major();Gc.full_major()" should be equivalent to
> "Gc.full_major()", as Gc.full_major() is told to terminate the
> current major gc and perform a complete new cycle.

They both perform a minor GC cycle too.
So you run a minor cycle twice with 'Gc.major(); Gc.full_major()', but only one with 'Gc.full_major()'.

> 
> In my case it is not the case: "Gc.major(); Gc.full_major()" performs
> more calls to finalisation functions than "Gc.full_major()".
> 
> My context: I use a weak hashtables containing finalised value (with
> Gc.finalise).
> 
> The documentation of Weak module specifies that the finalization
> function is called after the weak hashtbl/array has been set to
> none.
> 
> Does someone know the explanation of this ?

You can run 'Gc.print_stat stderr' to check how many GC minor/major cycles are run in both cases. The number of minor cycles should be different.

Best regards,
--Edwin