If it is something other than a memory leak, and if it is locatable :-)
would continuations in Wee become a 'recommended usage'?

"Eric Hodel" <drbrain / segment7.net> wrote

On 19 Jan 2005, at 08:15, Michael Neumann wrote:

> Am Mittwoch 19 Januar 2005 16:53 schrieb ts:
>>>>>>> "j" == jc  <james.cromwell / gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> j> This was posted recently:
>> j> http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/124213
>>
>>  This is the proof that the GC is conservative, this does not mean
>> that it
>>  exist a memory leak.
>
> Sure, but the results might be the same ;-)

I don't see a callcc in there anywhere, so
callback_stream.with_callbacks_for could be doing other naughty things.
  From personal experience with callcc, I would bet on something
referencing live objects over any memory leaks.