* segfault in CVS HEAD @ 2004-06-12 21:12 Han-Wen Nienhuys 2004-06-12 21:14 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Han-Wen Nienhuys @ 2004-06-12 21:12 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: jantien (I think I've already sent this, but I couldn't fidn a copy in my outbox.) this is with current CVS head byrd:~/usr/src/guile/libguile$ guile --debug t.scm Backtrace: In unknown file: ?: 0* [primitive-load "t.scm"] In t.scm: 1: 1* Segmentatie fout byrd:~/usr/src/guile/libguile$ cat t.scm (defiaine blub (cons (quote (1 . 2)) 2)) for some reason, GUILE unmemoizes the procedure during print; of course, the expression is not memoized, since evaluation stops after "defiaine". I've seen similar problems with invocations of procedure-source on valid code. Please fix - this is a serious error. -- Han-Wen Nienhuys | hanwen@xs4all.nl | http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* segfault in CVS HEAD 2004-06-12 21:12 segfault in CVS HEAD Han-Wen Nienhuys @ 2004-06-12 21:14 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys 2004-06-12 22:26 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Han-Wen Nienhuys @ 2004-06-12 21:14 UTC (permalink / raw) hanwen@xs4all.nl writes: > byrd:~/usr/src/guile/libguile$ cat t.scm > (defiaine blub (cons (quote (1 . 2)) 2)) > > > for some reason, GUILE unmemoizes the procedure during print; of > course, the expression is not memoized, since evaluation stops after > "defiaine". I've seen similar problems with invocations of > procedure-source on valid code. example: byrd:~/usr/src/guile/libguile$ cat t.scm (define (blub) (cons (quote (1 . 2)) 2)) (display (procedure-source blub)) byrd:~/usr/src/guile/libguile$ guile --debug t.scm Segmentatie fout byrd:~/usr/src/guile/libguile$ guile t.scm Segmentatie fout -- Han-Wen Nienhuys | hanwen@xs4all.nl | http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* segfault in CVS HEAD 2004-06-12 21:14 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys @ 2004-06-12 22:26 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys 2004-06-20 7:15 ` Dirk Herrmann 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Han-Wen Nienhuys @ 2004-06-12 22:26 UTC (permalink / raw) hanwen@xs4all.nl writes: > hanwen@xs4all.nl writes: > > byrd:~/usr/src/guile/libguile$ cat t.scm > > (defiaine blub (cons (quote (1 . 2)) 2)) > > > > > > for some reason, GUILE unmemoizes the procedure during print; of > > course, the expression is not memoized, since evaluation stops after > > "defiaine". I've seen similar problems with invocations of > > procedure-source on valid code. > > example: > > byrd:~/usr/src/guile/libguile$ cat t.scm > (define (blub) (cons (quote (1 . 2)) 2)) > (display (procedure-source blub)) > byrd:~/usr/src/guile/libguile$ guile --debug t.scm > Segmentatie fout > byrd:~/usr/src/guile/libguile$ guile t.scm > Segmentatie fout I've implemented a kludge in CVS: the for loop now has a SCM_CONSP as the condition. It produces incorrect output in the example that I sent, but at least it doesn't crash. BTW, why are vectors quoted in the unmemoize output? from unmemoize_expression(): else if (SCM_VECTORP (expr)) { return scm_list_2 (scm_sym_quote, expr); } -- Han-Wen Nienhuys | hanwen@xs4all.nl | http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: segfault in CVS HEAD 2004-06-12 22:26 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys @ 2004-06-20 7:15 ` Dirk Herrmann 2004-06-20 20:43 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Dirk Herrmann @ 2004-06-20 7:15 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: jantien, guile-devel Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > hanwen@xs4all.nl writes: > > > hanwen@xs4all.nl writes: > > > >> byrd:~/usr/src/guile/libguile$ cat t.scm (defiaine blub (cons > >> (quote (1 . 2)) 2)) >>> > >> for some reason, GUILE unmemoizes the procedure during print; of > >> course, the expression is not memoized, since evaluation stops > >> after "defiaine". I've seen similar problems with invocations of > >> procedure-source on valid code. Sorry for answering so late. The problem is due to some changes that I had introduced. > I've implemented a kludge in CVS: the for loop now has a SCM_CONSP as > the condition. It produces incorrect output in the example that I > sent, but at least it doesn't crash. I will fix it. Sorry again for the delay. > BTW, > > why are vectors quoted in the unmemoize output? from > unmemoize_expression(): Short answer: To make the unmemoized output R5RS compliant. Long answer, for everyone interested: According to R5RS, vector constants must be quoted. The reason is the following: #((1 + 2)) evaluates to #((1 + 2)) rather than #(3) To make this behaviour more obvious, R5RS demands to write '#((1 + 2)) Guile's executor does not need to see the quotes. That is, we strip away the quotes during memoization since this gives a slight performance improvement when dealing with vector constants. When unmemoizing the code again, however, in order to produce syntactically correct unmemoized code, the required quote is added again. Please compare the following: guile> (define (foo) #(1)) guile> (foo) #(1) guile> (procedure-source foo) (lambda () (quote #(1))) guile> (define (bar) '#(1)) guile> (bar) #(1) guile> (procedure-source bar) (lambda () (quote #(1))) Best regards Dirk Herrmann _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: segfault in CVS HEAD 2004-06-20 7:15 ` Dirk Herrmann @ 2004-06-20 20:43 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys 2004-06-21 21:08 ` Dirk Herrmann 2004-06-22 20:31 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys 0 siblings, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Han-Wen Nienhuys @ 2004-06-20 20:43 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: jantien, guile-devel, Marius Vollmer dirk@dirk-herrmanns-seiten.de writes: > Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > > > hanwen@xs4all.nl writes: > > > > > hanwen@xs4all.nl writes: > > > > > >> byrd:~/usr/src/guile/libguile$ cat t.scm (defiaine blub (cons > > >> (quote (1 . 2)) 2)) > >>> > > >> for some reason, GUILE unmemoizes the procedure during print; of > > >> course, the expression is not memoized, since evaluation stops > > >> after "defiaine". I've seen similar problems with invocations of > > >> procedure-source on valid code. > > Sorry for answering so late. The problem is due to some changes that I > had introduced. DO you have any idea when these issues will be fixed in CVS HEAD? Thanks, Han-Wen -- Han-Wen Nienhuys | hanwen@xs4all.nl | http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: segfault in CVS HEAD 2004-06-20 20:43 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys @ 2004-06-21 21:08 ` Dirk Herrmann 2004-06-22 10:12 ` Jan Nieuwenhuizen 2004-06-22 20:31 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys 1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Dirk Herrmann @ 2004-06-21 21:08 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: jantien, guile-devel, Marius Vollmer Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: >DO you have any idea when these issues will be fixed in CVS HEAD? > Hopefully they are fixed now. Best regards, Dirk _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: segfault in CVS HEAD 2004-06-21 21:08 ` Dirk Herrmann @ 2004-06-22 10:12 ` Jan Nieuwenhuizen 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Jan Nieuwenhuizen @ 2004-06-22 10:12 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: hanwen, guile-devel, Marius Vollmer Dirk Herrmann writes: > Hopefully they are fixed now. Yes, they are for me (ie, for guile-gnome). Thanks! Jan. -- Jan Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@gnu.org> | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien | http://www.lilypond.org _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: segfault in CVS HEAD 2004-06-20 20:43 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys 2004-06-21 21:08 ` Dirk Herrmann @ 2004-06-22 20:31 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys 2004-06-26 6:02 ` Dirk Herrmann 1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Han-Wen Nienhuys @ 2004-06-22 20:31 UTC (permalink / raw) hanwen@xs4all.nl writes: > > had introduced. > > DO you have any idea when these issues will be fixed in CVS HEAD? > unfortunately, your fix was not completely successful: In unknown file: ?: 0* [lilypond-main ("input/regression/lily-in-scheme")] In /home/hanwen/usr/src/lilypond/scm/lily.scm: 556: 1* Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. [Switching to Thread 1074533568 (LWP 27330)] unmemoize_expression (expr=0x21c, env=0x404) at eval.c:549 (gdb) l 544 545 for (frame_idx = env, frame_nr = SCM_IFRAME (expr); 546 frame_nr != 0; 547 frame_idx = SCM_CDR (frame_idx), --frame_nr) 548 ; 549 for (symbol_idx = SCM_CAAR (frame_idx), symbol_nr = SCM_IDIST (expr); 550 symbol_nr != 0; 551 symbol_idx = SCM_CDR (symbol_idx), --symbol_nr) 552 ; 553 return SCM_ICDRP (expr) ? symbol_idx : SCM_CAR (symbol_idx); (gdb) ps expr #@2+0 $25 = void (gdb) ps env () $26 = void (gdb) up #1 0x4002c2f8 in unmemoize_exprs (exprs=0x404de0b8, env=0x404fdba0) at eval.c:597 (gdb) ps exprs (#<variable 403c85b0 value: #<primitive-generic for-each>> (#@lambda (f) (#<variable 402d0c98 value: #<primitive-procedure catch>> (#@quote . ly-file-failed) (#@lambda () (#<variable 402ee878 value: #<primitive-procedure ly:parse-file>> #@1+0)) #@1-0)) #@2+0) $27 = void (gdb) ps env (((files) (input/regression/lily-in-scheme)) #<eval-closure 403067f8>) $28 = void (gdb) -- Han-Wen Nienhuys | hanwen@xs4all.nl | http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: segfault in CVS HEAD 2004-06-22 20:31 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys @ 2004-06-26 6:02 ` Dirk Herrmann 2004-06-26 8:26 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Dirk Herrmann @ 2004-06-26 6:02 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: jantien, guile-devel, Marius Vollmer Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: >unfortunately, your fix was not completely successful: > Sorry, but I don't have sufficient information yet. Could you provide a simple test case that allows to reproduce the problem? If that is not possible, I could probably also do with a stack backtrace together with the printout of the expression and environment at the uppermost call to an unmemoization function. Sorry for the inconvenience, Dirk _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: segfault in CVS HEAD 2004-06-26 6:02 ` Dirk Herrmann @ 2004-06-26 8:26 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Han-Wen Nienhuys @ 2004-06-26 8:26 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: jantien, guile-devel, Marius Vollmer dirk@dirk-herrmanns-seiten.de writes: > Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > > >unfortunately, your fix was not completely successful: > > > Sorry, but I don't have sufficient information yet. Could you provide a > simple test case that allows to reproduce the problem? If that is not > possible, I could probably also do with a stack backtrace together with > the printout of the expression and environment at the uppermost call to > an unmemoization function. > > Sorry for the inconvenience, > Dirk I don't have time now to isolate a failure case. The best I can do is: get lilypond-2.3.5 (go to lilypond.org), compile it, remove comments (the %{ and %} ) from input/regression/lily-in-scheme.ly and do lily/out/lilypond-bin -V input/regression/lily-in-scheme.ly this will produce a similar crash. (gdb) down #3 0x4002ecd4 in scm_unmemocopy (forms=0x404ded30, env=0x404fe798) at eval.c:2401 2401 const SCM um_forms = unmemoize_exprs (forms, env); (gdb) ps forms (#@let* (failed (#@quote) handler (#@lambda (key arg) #@lambda (set! failed (cons arg failed)))) (#<variable 403c7ba8 value: #<primitive-generic for-each>> (#@lambda (f) (#<variable 402d0c98 value: #<primitive-procedure catch>> (#@quote . ly-file-failed) (#@lambda () (#<variable 402ee878 value: #<primitive-procedure ly:parse-file>> #@1+0)) #@1-0)) #@2+0) (if (pair? failed) (begin (display (string-append *** Failed files: (string-join failed) )) (exit 1)) (exit 0))) $3 = void (gdb) ps env (((files) (input/regression/lily-in-scheme.ly)) #<eval-closure 403067f8>) $4 = void (gdb) bt #0 unmemoize_expression (expr=0x21c, env=0x404) at eval.c:549 #1 0x4002c2f8 in unmemoize_exprs (exprs=0x404deb88, env=0x404fe798) at eval.c:597 #2 0x4002c2f8 in unmemoize_exprs (exprs=0x404ded30, env=0x404fe798) at eval.c:597 #3 0x4002ecd4 in scm_unmemocopy (forms=0x404ded30, env=0x404fe798) at eval.c:2401 #4 0x40025174 in scm_unmemoize (m=0x21c) at debug.c:282 #5 0x40021d23 in display_frame (frame=0x405fd220, nfield=2, indentation=1, sport=0x405fd2c0, port=0x402d41d8, pstate=0x82b1680) at backtrace.c:621 #6 0x40022023 in display_backtrace_body (a=0xbfffd860) at backtrace.c:728 #7 0x4006ec5d in scm_internal_catch (tag=0x104, body=0x40021dc4 <display_backtrace_body>, body_data=0xbfffd860, handler=0x40021324 <display_error_handler>, handler_data=0xbfffd858) at throw.c:172 #8 0x4002220b in scm_display_backtrace (stack=0x0, port=0x404, first=0x0, depth=0x0) at backtrace.c:758 #9 0x4006f11e in handler_message (handler_data=0x0, tag=0x824c8a0, args=0x405fd360) at throw.c:401 #10 0x4006f1a0 in scm_handle_by_message (handler_data=0x0, tag=0x824c8a0, args=0x405fd360) at throw.c:452 #11 0x4006f3fc in scm_ithrow (key=0x824c8a0, args=0x405fd360, noreturn=1) at throw.c:597 #12 0x4002afc1 in scm_error (key=0x824c8a0, subr=0x0, message=0x404 <Address 0x404 out of bounds>, args=0x405fd388, rest=0x4) at error.c:71 > -- Han-Wen Nienhuys | hanwen@xs4all.nl | http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <40DD5A64.60300@ccrma>]
[parent not found: <40DEC836.3010806@dirk-herrmanns-seiten.de>]
[parent not found: <40E2917A.7010106@ccrma>]
* Re: segfault in CVS HEAD [not found] ` <40E2917A.7010106@ccrma> @ 2004-07-14 7:22 ` Dirk Herrmann 2004-07-14 12:36 ` Dale P. Smith 2004-08-21 8:00 ` Dirk Herrmann 1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Dirk Herrmann @ 2004-07-14 7:22 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: Guile-Devel Mailing List Bill Schottstaedt wrote: > There's still one case where the lambda tag appears -- > if you include a documentation string: > > guile> (define (hi) "this is a comment" 34) > guile> (procedure-source hi) > (lambda () "this is a comment" #@lambda 34) > > Also I notice that "let" is sometimes changed to "let*", and > in the define* case I get "(lambda lambda*:G0 (let-optional* > lambda*:G0" etc. I will take care of the problem in about two or three weeks. (Got just married last week, will leave for honeymoon in about one hour...) Best regards, Dirk _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: segfault in CVS HEAD 2004-07-14 7:22 ` Dirk Herrmann @ 2004-07-14 12:36 ` Dale P. Smith 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Dale P. Smith @ 2004-07-14 12:36 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: Bill Schottstaedt, Guile-Devel Mailing List Dirk Herrmann <dirk@dirk-herrmanns-seiten.de> writes: > I will take care of the problem in about two or three weeks. (Got just > married last week, will leave for honeymoon in about one hour...) Wow! Congratulations Dirk. May God richly bless your life together. -Dale -- Dale P. Smith dsmith at actron dot com _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: segfault in CVS HEAD [not found] ` <40E2917A.7010106@ccrma> 2004-07-14 7:22 ` Dirk Herrmann @ 2004-08-21 8:00 ` Dirk Herrmann 2004-08-23 10:43 ` Bill Schottstaedt 1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Dirk Herrmann @ 2004-08-21 8:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Bill Schottstaedt wrote: > There's still one case where the lambda tag appears -- > if you include a documentation string: > > guile> (define (hi) "this is a comment" 34) > guile> (procedure-source hi) > (lambda () "this is a comment" #@lambda 34) > > Also I notice that "let" is sometimes changed to "let*", and > in the define* case I get "(lambda lambda*:G0 (let-optional* > lambda*:G0" etc. Sorry for the delay. I have submitted a patch, that fixes the documentation string issue. Regarding let being changed to let*: As far as I know, guile has always done such conversions in certain circumstances, not just since my recent changes. In the medium term, there will probably even more of such conversions be introduced, since they are intended as optimizations. Do the recent changes introduce a problem for you, or was this just to be seen as a general comment? If it is a problem for you, could you please give more details and also some examples? Thanks a lot, and sorry again for the delay until I fixed the code. Best regards, Dirk _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: segfault in CVS HEAD 2004-08-21 8:00 ` Dirk Herrmann @ 2004-08-23 10:43 ` Bill Schottstaedt 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Bill Schottstaedt @ 2004-08-23 10:43 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: Guile-Devel Mailing List > Sorry for the delay. I have submitted a patch, that fixes the documentation string issue. Thanks -- my test suite is happy again! > Regarding let being changed to let*: As far as I know, guile has always done > such conversions in certain circumstances, not just since my recent changes. I noticed more such changes recently -- they aren't incorrect, just annoying if you're writing auto-testing stuff, and need to check that procedures are correctly set up. They're not a big problem. _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-08-23 10:43 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-06-12 21:12 segfault in CVS HEAD Han-Wen Nienhuys
2004-06-12 21:14 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys
2004-06-12 22:26 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys
2004-06-20 7:15 ` Dirk Herrmann
2004-06-20 20:43 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys
2004-06-21 21:08 ` Dirk Herrmann
2004-06-22 10:12 ` Jan Nieuwenhuizen
2004-06-22 20:31 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys
2004-06-26 6:02 ` Dirk Herrmann
2004-06-26 8:26 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys
[not found] <40DD5A64.60300@ccrma>
[not found] ` <40DEC836.3010806@dirk-herrmanns-seiten.de>
[not found] ` <40E2917A.7010106@ccrma>
2004-07-14 7:22 ` Dirk Herrmann
2004-07-14 12:36 ` Dale P. Smith
2004-08-21 8:00 ` Dirk Herrmann
2004-08-23 10:43 ` Bill Schottstaedt
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).