Subject: bug#17168: 24.3.50; Segfault at mark_object

From: Daniel Colascione <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2014 22:11:13 -0700

On 04/05/2014 10:05 PM, Dmitry Antipov wrote:
> I.e. the whole thing becomes grossly
> overengineered.

Compared to what? We can't leave the bug in the code. We can't go back
to precise GC. The pure symbol-name thing is a hacky workaround, and
there may be other bugs lurking. It's either this or removing pure
storage, and at least this code is already written and maintains
resource consumption at 24.3 levels.