From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Neil Jerram Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.bugs Subject: Re: Fix for 1001-local-eval-error-backtrace-segfaults - please review Date: 05 May 2002 15:00:59 +0100 Sender: bug-guile-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1020607575 9495 127.0.0.1 (5 May 2002 14:06:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 5 May 2002 14:06:15 +0000 (UTC) Cc: bug-guile@gnu.org, johns776@pilot.msu.edu Return-path: Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 174MeU-0002T2-00 for ; Sun, 05 May 2002 16:06:14 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 174MeQ-0000DW-00; Sun, 05 May 2002 10:06:10 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.uklinux.net ([80.84.72.21] helo=s1.uklinux.net) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 174Mcd-0008Tj-00 for ; Sun, 05 May 2002 10:04:19 -0400 Original-Received: from portalet.ossau.uklinux.net (dial-212-159-138-176.access.uk.tiscali.com [212.159.138.176]) by s1.uklinux.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g45E42o01780; Sun, 5 May 2002 15:04:04 +0100 Original-Received: from laruns.ossau.uklinux.net.ossau.uklinux.net (laruns.ossau.uklinux.net [192.168.1.3]) by portalet.ossau.uklinux.net (Postfix on SuSE Linux 7.2 (i386)) with ESMTP id F1EC7C19; Sun, 5 May 2002 15:05:14 +0000 (GMT) Original-To: ttn@glug.org Original-Lines: 47 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7 Errors-To: bug-guile-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: bug-guile@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Bug reports for GUILE, GNU's Ubiquitous Extension Language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.bugs:220 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.bugs:220 >>>>> "thi" == Thien-Thi Nguyen writes: thi> From: Neil Jerram thi> Date: 02 May 2002 13:59:06 +0100 thi> The copy in scm_unmemocopy, which looks as though it might be thi> intended to fix this problem [...] thi> was this used previously? (i'm trying to crawl inside the head of thi> whoever wrote it this way in the first place.) I don't know. The most likely ChangeLog entry I can find is `Tue Aug 20 18:48:40 1996 Mikael Djurfeldt', which describes the initial addition of scm_unmemocopy. thi> Fix isn't very elegant, though; thi> is there a nicer way of doing this? thi> both the old way and the new way involve mutating some nested list thi> structure, so i'm guessing that doesn't play into "elegance". No; the new way doesn't mutate at all. It creates a new environment that shares some substructure with the old environment. thi> i'm wondering what is it about this fix that makes it not thi> very elegant? My fix may use more consing than it needs to. Where possible, I feel that mutation is desirable because it's faster and doesn't encourage the GC. So perhaps there's a fix that still works but with fewer than 3 new pairs. thi> 2. Rerun of problem scenarios: thi> cool. this touches upon the need to extend the testing framework to thi> handle interactive cases. actually, i believe that's already possible thi> w/ the current framework via (ice-9 expect); the limitation really is thi> that all tests share an execution environment -- this is fine for the thi> most part, but undesirable for this kind of bug. But, does this test need a different execution environment? It's true for any existing test case that, if it causes a SEGV, the following test cases won't run. This doesn't worry us much because SEGVs aren't an important part of our plans :-) Neil _______________________________________________ Bug-guile mailing list Bug-guile@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guile