From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.bugs Subject: bug#17485: Ugh, well... Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 09:43:35 +0200 Message-ID: <871t2z713s.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <87y4y6t0or.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1468314805 14629 80.91.229.3 (12 Jul 2016 09:13:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 09:13:25 +0000 (UTC) To: 17485@debbugs.gnu.org Original-X-From: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 12 11:13:16 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-bugs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1bMtkg-0007pr-C5 for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 11:13:14 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38575 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bMtkf-0004C7-NF for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 05:13:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51448) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bMtkX-0004Ag-EX for bug-guile@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 05:13:06 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bMtkV-00055K-Ev for bug-guile@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 05:13:04 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:35274) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bMtkV-00055D-Bt for bug-guile@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 05:13:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bMtkU-0003ig-0z for bug-guile@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 05:13:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org In-Reply-To: <87y4y6t0or.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> Resent-From: David Kastrup Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guile@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 09:13:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 17485 X-GNU-PR-Package: guile X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 17485-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B17485.146831476514272 (code B ref 17485); Tue, 12 Jul 2016 09:13:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 17485) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Jul 2016 09:12:45 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47611 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bMtkD-0003i8-EJ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 05:12:45 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:60360) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bMtkB-0003ht-VI for 17485@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 05:12:44 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bMtk5-000525-Tx for 17485@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 05:12:38 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:32795 helo=lola.localdomain) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bMtk5-00051u-Ld for 17485@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 05:12:37 -0400 Original-Received: by lola.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E8194E48A6; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 09:43:35 +0200 (CEST) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-guile@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GUILE, GNU's Ubiquitous Extension Language" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-guile" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.bugs:8296 Archived-At: Sorry, I really should have checked the whole bug report before agreeing with the resolution. The actual problem triggering the stack overflow problem in the original report was not even in reduce-right but rather in drop-right. drop-right is still defective im the original manner. So this is "fixing" only the titular symptom of the quite larger underlying set of problems underlying this issue report. -- David Kastrup