* Re: Can't make a stack from a continuation
[not found] <41A23580.6070702@ossau.uklinux.net>
@ 2004-11-25 19:43 ` Neil Jerram
2004-12-17 1:42 ` Neil Jerram
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Neil Jerram @ 2004-11-25 19:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: bug-guile
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 294 bytes --]
Neil Jerram wrote:
> neil@laruns:~$ guile -q
> guile> (version)
> "1.6.4"
> guile> (call-with-current-continuation make-stack)
> Segmentation fault
I believe I have the fix for this (diffs attached for 1.6.x). Would
anyone who feels half-confident in this area please review?
Thanks,
Neil
[-- Attachment #2: stacks.c.diff --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 4239 bytes --]
Index: libguile/stacks.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/guile/guile/guile-core/libguile/stacks.c,v
retrieving revision 1.64.2.4
diff -u -u -r1.64.2.4 stacks.c
--- libguile/stacks.c 15 Mar 2002 10:33:37 -0000 1.64.2.4
+++ libguile/stacks.c 25 Nov 2004 19:43:20 -0000
@@ -162,10 +162,11 @@
if (SCM_EVALFRAMEP (*dframe))
{
scm_t_debug_info * info = RELOC_INFO (dframe->info, offset);
- n += (info - dframe->vect) / 2 + 1;
+ scm_t_debug_info * vect = RELOC_INFO (dframe->vect, offset);
+ n += (info - vect) / 2 + 1;
/* Data in the apply part of an eval info frame comes from previous
stack frame if the scm_t_debug_info vector is overflowed. */
- if ((((info - dframe->vect) & 1) == 0)
+ if ((((info - vect) & 1) == 0)
&& SCM_OVERFLOWP (*dframe)
&& !SCM_UNBNDP (info[1].a.proc))
++n;
@@ -174,7 +175,7 @@
++n;
}
if (dframe && SCM_VOIDFRAMEP (*dframe))
- *id = dframe->vect[0].id;
+ *id = RELOC_INFO (dframe->vect, offset) -> id;
else if (dframe)
*maxp = 1;
return n;
@@ -189,7 +190,8 @@
if (SCM_EVALFRAMEP (*dframe))
{
scm_t_debug_info * info = RELOC_INFO (dframe->info, offset);
- if ((info - dframe->vect) & 1)
+ scm_t_debug_info * vect = RELOC_INFO (dframe->vect, offset);
+ if ((info - vect) & 1)
{
/* Debug.vect ends with apply info. */
--info;
@@ -206,9 +208,10 @@
}
else
{
+ scm_t_debug_info * vect = RELOC_INFO (dframe->vect, offset);
flags |= SCM_FRAMEF_PROC;
- iframe->proc = dframe->vect[0].a.proc;
- iframe->args = dframe->vect[0].a.args;
+ iframe->proc = vect[0].a.proc;
+ iframe->args = vect[0].a.args;
}
iframe->flags = flags;
}
@@ -254,6 +257,7 @@
{
scm_t_info_frame *iframe = iframes;
scm_t_debug_info *info;
+ scm_t_debug_info *vect;
static SCM applybody = SCM_UNDEFINED;
/* The value of applybody has to be setup after r4rs.scm has executed. */
@@ -275,7 +279,8 @@
--iframe;
}
info = RELOC_INFO (dframe->info, offset);
- if ((info - dframe->vect) & 1)
+ vect = RELOC_INFO (dframe->vect, offset);
+ if ((info - vect) & 1)
--info;
/* Data in the apply part of an eval info frame comes from
previous stack frame if the scm_t_debug_info vector is
@@ -292,7 +297,7 @@
iframe->flags |= SCM_FRAMEF_OVERFLOW;
info -= 2;
NEXT_FRAME (iframe, n, quit);
- while (info >= dframe->vect)
+ while (info >= vect)
{
if (!SCM_UNBNDP (info[1].a.proc))
{
@@ -462,8 +467,7 @@
}
else if (SCM_CONTINUATIONP (obj))
{
- offset = ((SCM_STACKITEM *) ((char *) SCM_CONTREGS (obj) + sizeof (scm_t_contregs))
- - SCM_BASE (obj));
+ offset = (SCM_CONTREGS (obj) -> stack) - SCM_BASE (obj);
#ifndef STACK_GROWS_UP
offset += SCM_CONTINUATION_LENGTH (obj);
#endif
@@ -490,7 +494,7 @@
SCM_STACK (stack) -> frames = iframe;
/* Translate the current chain of stack frames into debugging information. */
- n = read_frames (RELOC_FRAME (dframe, offset), offset, n, iframe);
+ n = read_frames (dframe, offset, n, iframe);
SCM_STACK (stack) -> length = n;
/* Narrow the stack according to the arguments given to scm_make_stack. */
@@ -546,8 +550,7 @@
}
else if (SCM_CONTINUATIONP (stack))
{
- offset = ((SCM_STACKITEM *) ((char *) SCM_CONTREGS (stack) + sizeof (scm_t_contregs))
- - SCM_BASE (stack));
+ offset = (SCM_CONTREGS (stack) -> stack) - SCM_BASE (stack);
#ifndef STACK_GROWS_UP
offset += SCM_CONTINUATION_LENGTH (stack);
#endif
@@ -565,7 +568,7 @@
while (dframe && !SCM_VOIDFRAMEP (*dframe))
dframe = RELOC_FRAME (dframe->prev, offset);
if (dframe && SCM_VOIDFRAMEP (*dframe))
- return dframe->vect[0].id;
+ return RELOC_INFO (dframe->vect, offset) -> id;
return SCM_BOOL_F;
}
#undef FUNC_NAME
@@ -625,8 +628,7 @@
}
else if (SCM_CONTINUATIONP (obj))
{
- offset = ((SCM_STACKITEM *) ((char *) SCM_CONTREGS (obj) + sizeof (scm_t_contregs))
- - SCM_BASE (obj));
+ offset = (SCM_CONTREGS (obj) -> stack) - SCM_BASE (obj);
#ifndef STACK_GROWS_UP
offset += SCM_CONTINUATION_LENGTH (obj);
#endif
[-- Attachment #3: eval.test.diff --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 899 bytes --]
Index: test-suite/tests/eval.test
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/guile/guile/guile-core/test-suite/tests/eval.test,v
retrieving revision 1.6.2.1
diff -u -u -r1.6.2.1 eval.test
--- test-suite/tests/eval.test 19 Jul 2001 20:49:34 -0000 1.6.2.1
+++ test-suite/tests/eval.test 25 Nov 2004 19:43:20 -0000
@@ -177,4 +177,26 @@
(map + '(1 2) '(3)))
)))
+;;;
+;;; continuations
+;;;
+
+(with-test-prefix "continuation"
+
+ (with-test-prefix "stacks/debugging"
+
+ (debug-enable 'debug)
+
+ (pass-if "make-stack"
+ (stack? (call-with-current-continuation make-stack)))
+
+ (pass-if "stack-id"
+ (let ((id (call-with-current-continuation stack-id)))
+ (or (boolean? id) (symbol? id))))
+
+ (pass-if "last-stack-frame"
+ (pair? (call-with-current-continuation last-stack-frame)))
+
+ ))
+
;;; eval.test ends here
[-- Attachment #4: Type: text/plain, Size: 137 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
Bug-guile mailing list
Bug-guile@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guile
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: Can't make a stack from a continuation
2004-11-25 19:43 ` Can't make a stack from a continuation Neil Jerram
@ 2004-12-17 1:42 ` Neil Jerram
2004-12-23 14:24 ` Marius Vollmer
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Neil Jerram @ 2004-12-17 1:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: bug-guile
Neil Jerram wrote:
> Neil Jerram wrote:
>
>> neil@laruns:~$ guile -q
>> guile> (version)
>> "1.6.4"
>> guile> (call-with-current-continuation make-stack)
>> Segmentation fault
>
>
> I believe I have the fix for this (diffs attached for 1.6.x). Would
> anyone who feels half-confident in this area please review?
A further aspect of this that has been bothering me, is why it doesn't
show up in all the occurrences of (make-stack *cont*) that my debugging
code does when called from one of the eval trap handlers. The answer (I
believe) is that the eval trap handlers don't use real continuations;
they use "debug objects" instead; this is controlled by the 'cheaptraps
debug option, which defaults to "yes".
And one more problem ... the same problem exists in CVS head, but a
similar patch doesn't fix it ... still investigating.
Neil
_______________________________________________
Bug-guile mailing list
Bug-guile@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guile
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: Can't make a stack from a continuation
2004-12-17 1:42 ` Neil Jerram
@ 2004-12-23 14:24 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-12-23 15:36 ` Marius Vollmer
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Marius Vollmer @ 2004-12-23 14:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: bug-guile, guile-devel
Neil Jerram <neil@ossau.uklinux.net> writes:
> And one more problem ... the same problem exists in CVS head, but a
> similar patch doesn't fix it ... still investigating.
I'm looking into this as well, now. The fix you did for 1.6 looks
good, although I don't understand it completely yet. I will try to
come up with my own patch to CVS head. One larger change I have in
mind is to move the offset calculation into the continuation code
itself, which is where it belongs. Each continuation will get a new
"offset" field and the stack code will just use it.
_______________________________________________
Bug-guile mailing list
Bug-guile@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guile
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: Can't make a stack from a continuation
2004-12-23 14:24 ` Marius Vollmer
@ 2004-12-23 15:36 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-12-24 23:05 ` Neil Jerram
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Marius Vollmer @ 2004-12-23 15:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: bug-guile, guile-devel
Marius Vollmer <marius.vollmer@uni-dortmund.de> writes:
> Neil Jerram <neil@ossau.uklinux.net> writes:
>
>> And one more problem ... the same problem exists in CVS head, but a
>> similar patch doesn't fix it ... still investigating.
>
> I'm looking into this as well, now. The fix you did for 1.6 looks
> good, although I don't understand it completely yet. I will try to
> come up with my own patch to CVS head.
Here it is. I have already applied it to CVS. I think a similar
scheme can be used for 1.6, too: i.e., move the offset calculation
into scm_make_continuation.
Neil, do you want to fix 1.6 yourself?
Index: continuations.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/guile/guile/guile-core/libguile/continuations.c,v
retrieving revision 1.54
diff -u -r1.54 continuations.c
--- continuations.c 22 Oct 2004 15:13:12 -0000 1.54
+++ continuations.c 23 Dec 2004 15:26:20 -0000
@@ -134,6 +134,7 @@
#if ! SCM_STACK_GROWS_UP
src -= stack_size;
#endif
+ continuation->offset = continuation->stack - src;
memcpy (continuation->stack, src, sizeof (SCM_STACKITEM) * stack_size);
#ifdef __ia64__
Index: continuations.h
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/guile/guile/guile-core/libguile/continuations.h,v
retrieving revision 1.31
diff -u -r1.31 continuations.h
--- continuations.h 25 Jun 2003 18:12:35 -0000 1.31
+++ continuations.h 23 Dec 2004 15:26:20 -0000
@@ -55,8 +55,19 @@
size_t num_stack_items; /* size of the saved stack. */
unsigned long seq; /* dynamic root identifier. */
- /* the most recently created debug frame on the live stack, before
- it was saved. */
+ /* The offset from the live stack location and this copy. This is
+ used to adjust pointers from within the copied stack to the stack
+ itself.
+
+ Thus, when you read a pointer from the copied stack that points
+ into the live stack, you need to add OFFSET so that it points
+ into the copy.
+ */
+ scm_t_ptrdiff offset;
+
+ /* The most recently created debug frame on the live stack, before
+ it was saved. This need to be adjusted with OFFSET, above.
+ */
struct scm_t_debug_frame *dframe;
SCM_STACKITEM stack[1]; /* copied stack of size num_stack_items. */
Index: stacks.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/guile/guile/guile-core/libguile/stacks.c,v
retrieving revision 1.80
diff -u -r1.80 stacks.c
--- stacks.c 22 Sep 2004 17:41:37 -0000 1.80
+++ stacks.c 23 Dec 2004 15:26:20 -0000
@@ -124,7 +124,8 @@
* is read from a continuation.
*/
static scm_t_bits
-stack_depth (scm_t_debug_frame *dframe, long offset, SCM *id, int *maxp)
+stack_depth (scm_t_debug_frame *dframe, scm_t_ptrdiff offset,
+ SCM *id, int *maxp)
{
long n;
long max_depth = SCM_BACKTRACE_MAXDEPTH;
@@ -134,11 +135,12 @@
{
if (SCM_EVALFRAMEP (*dframe))
{
- scm_t_debug_info * info = RELOC_INFO (dframe->info, offset);
- n += (info - dframe->vect) / 2 + 1;
+ scm_t_debug_info *info = RELOC_INFO (dframe->info, offset);
+ scm_t_debug_info *vect = RELOC_INFO (dframe->vect, offset);
+ n += (info - vect) / 2 + 1;
/* Data in the apply part of an eval info frame comes from previous
stack frame if the scm_t_debug_info vector is overflowed. */
- if ((((info - dframe->vect) & 1) == 0)
+ if ((((info - vect) & 1) == 0)
&& SCM_OVERFLOWP (*dframe)
&& !SCM_UNBNDP (info[1].a.proc))
++n;
@@ -147,7 +149,7 @@
++n;
}
if (dframe && SCM_VOIDFRAMEP (*dframe))
- *id = dframe->vect[0].id;
+ *id = RELOC_INFO(dframe->vect, offset)[0].id;
else if (dframe)
*maxp = 1;
return n;
@@ -156,13 +158,15 @@
/* Read debug info from DFRAME into IFRAME.
*/
static void
-read_frame (scm_t_debug_frame *dframe, long offset, scm_t_info_frame *iframe)
+read_frame (scm_t_debug_frame *dframe, scm_t_ptrdiff offset,
+ scm_t_info_frame *iframe)
{
scm_t_bits flags = SCM_UNPACK (SCM_INUM0); /* UGh. */
if (SCM_EVALFRAMEP (*dframe))
{
- scm_t_debug_info * info = RELOC_INFO (dframe->info, offset);
- if ((info - dframe->vect) & 1)
+ scm_t_debug_info *info = RELOC_INFO (dframe->info, offset);
+ scm_t_debug_info *vect = RELOC_INFO (dframe->vect, offset);
+ if ((info - vect) & 1)
{
/* Debug.vect ends with apply info. */
--info;
@@ -179,9 +183,10 @@
}
else
{
+ scm_t_debug_info *vect = RELOC_INFO (dframe->vect, offset);
flags |= SCM_FRAMEF_PROC;
- iframe->proc = dframe->vect[0].a.proc;
- iframe->args = dframe->vect[0].a.args;
+ iframe->proc = vect[0].a.proc;
+ iframe->args = vect[0].a.args;
}
iframe->flags = flags;
}
@@ -223,10 +228,11 @@
*/
static scm_t_bits
-read_frames (scm_t_debug_frame *dframe, long offset, long n, scm_t_info_frame *iframes)
+read_frames (scm_t_debug_frame *dframe, scm_t_ptrdiff offset,
+ long n, scm_t_info_frame *iframes)
{
scm_t_info_frame *iframe = iframes;
- scm_t_debug_info *info;
+ scm_t_debug_info *info, *vect;
static SCM applybody = SCM_UNDEFINED;
/* The value of applybody has to be setup after r4rs.scm has executed. */
@@ -248,7 +254,8 @@
--iframe;
}
info = RELOC_INFO (dframe->info, offset);
- if ((info - dframe->vect) & 1)
+ vect = RELOC_INFO (dframe->vect, offset);
+ if ((info - vect) & 1)
--info;
/* Data in the apply part of an eval info frame comes from
previous stack frame if the scm_t_debug_info vector is
@@ -265,7 +272,7 @@
iframe->flags |= SCM_FRAMEF_OVERFLOW;
info -= 2;
NEXT_FRAME (iframe, n, quit);
- while (info >= dframe->vect)
+ while (info >= vect)
{
if (!SCM_UNBNDP (info[1].a.proc))
{
@@ -435,12 +442,9 @@
}
else if (SCM_CONTINUATIONP (obj))
{
- offset = ((SCM_STACKITEM *) ((char *) SCM_CONTREGS (obj) + sizeof (scm_t_contregs))
- - SCM_BASE (obj));
-#if SCM_STACK_GROWS_UP
- offset += SCM_CONTINUATION_LENGTH (obj);
-#endif
- dframe = RELOC_FRAME (SCM_DFRAME (obj), offset);
+ scm_t_contregs *cont = SCM_CONTREGS (obj);
+ offset = cont->offset;
+ dframe = RELOC_FRAME (cont->dframe, offset);
}
else
{
@@ -463,7 +467,7 @@
SCM_STACK (stack) -> frames = iframe;
/* Translate the current chain of stack frames into debugging information. */
- n = read_frames (RELOC_FRAME (dframe, offset), offset, n, iframe);
+ n = read_frames (dframe, offset, n, iframe);
SCM_STACK (stack) -> length = n;
/* Narrow the stack according to the arguments given to scm_make_stack. */
@@ -519,12 +523,9 @@
}
else if (SCM_CONTINUATIONP (stack))
{
- offset = ((SCM_STACKITEM *) ((char *) SCM_CONTREGS (stack) + sizeof (scm_t_contregs))
- - SCM_BASE (stack));
-#if SCM_STACK_GROWS_UP
- offset += SCM_CONTINUATION_LENGTH (stack);
-#endif
- dframe = RELOC_FRAME (SCM_DFRAME (stack), offset);
+ scm_t_contregs *cont = SCM_CONTREGS (stack);
+ offset = cont->offset;
+ dframe = RELOC_FRAME (cont->dframe, offset);
}
else if (SCM_STACKP (stack))
{
@@ -538,7 +539,7 @@
while (dframe && !SCM_VOIDFRAMEP (*dframe))
dframe = RELOC_FRAME (dframe->prev, offset);
if (dframe && SCM_VOIDFRAMEP (*dframe))
- return dframe->vect[0].id;
+ return RELOC_INFO (dframe->vect, offset)[0].id;
return SCM_BOOL_F;
}
#undef FUNC_NAME
@@ -595,12 +596,9 @@
}
else if (SCM_CONTINUATIONP (obj))
{
- offset = ((SCM_STACKITEM *) ((char *) SCM_CONTREGS (obj) + sizeof (scm_t_contregs))
- - SCM_BASE (obj));
-#if SCM_STACK_GROWS_UP
- offset += SCM_CONTINUATION_LENGTH (obj);
-#endif
- dframe = RELOC_FRAME (SCM_DFRAME (obj), offset);
+ scm_t_contregs *cont = SCM_CONTREGS (obj);
+ offset = cont->offset;
+ dframe = RELOC_FRAME (cont->dframe, offset);
}
else
{
_______________________________________________
Bug-guile mailing list
Bug-guile@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guile
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: Can't make a stack from a continuation
2004-12-23 15:36 ` Marius Vollmer
@ 2004-12-24 23:05 ` Neil Jerram
2004-12-24 23:11 ` Neil Jerram
2004-12-24 23:21 ` Marius Vollmer
0 siblings, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Neil Jerram @ 2004-12-24 23:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: bug-guile, guile-devel
Marius Vollmer wrote:
> Marius Vollmer <marius.vollmer@uni-dortmund.de> writes:
>
>
>>Neil Jerram <neil@ossau.uklinux.net> writes:
>>
>>
>>>And one more problem ... the same problem exists in CVS head, but a
>>>similar patch doesn't fix it ... still investigating.
>>
>>I'm looking into this as well, now. The fix you did for 1.6 looks
>>good, although I don't understand it completely yet. I will try to
>>come up with my own patch to CVS head.
>
>
> Here it is. I have already applied it to CVS. I think a similar
> scheme can be used for 1.6, too: i.e., move the offset calculation
> into scm_make_continuation.
>
> Neil, do you want to fix 1.6 yourself?
>
> [patch]
This change (calculating and storing the offset in
scm_make_continuation) makes sense, but I'd like also to understand
where the bug was in my version (using offset = (SCM_CONTREGS (stack) ->
stack) - SCM_BASE (stack);) and why my code worked in 1.6 but not in
head. Would you mind explaining?
Thanks,
Neil
PS. Merry Christmas!
_______________________________________________
Bug-guile mailing list
Bug-guile@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guile
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: Can't make a stack from a continuation
2004-12-24 23:05 ` Neil Jerram
@ 2004-12-24 23:11 ` Neil Jerram
2004-12-24 23:22 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-12-24 23:21 ` Marius Vollmer
1 sibling, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Neil Jerram @ 2004-12-24 23:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: bug-guile, guile-devel
Neil Jerram wrote:
> This change (calculating and storing the offset in
> scm_make_continuation) makes sense [...]
One more thing - are you happy with the proposed new tests for 1.6 and
head? I think one change is needed, namely to save and restore
(debug-options) so that the effect of (debug-enable 'debug) can't affect
other tests.
Neil
_______________________________________________
Bug-guile mailing list
Bug-guile@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guile
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: Can't make a stack from a continuation
2004-12-24 23:05 ` Neil Jerram
2004-12-24 23:11 ` Neil Jerram
@ 2004-12-24 23:21 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-12-25 10:50 ` Neil Jerram
1 sibling, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Marius Vollmer @ 2004-12-24 23:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: bug-guile, guile-devel
Neil Jerram <neil@ossau.uklinux.net> writes:
> This change (calculating and storing the offset in
> scm_make_continuation) makes sense, but I'd like also to understand
> where the bug was in my version (using offset = (SCM_CONTREGS
> (stack) -> stack) - SCM_BASE (stack);) and why my code worked in 1.6
> but not in head. Would you mind explaining?
Hmm, I didn't really try to debug your patch. I followed its idea of
also relocating dframe->vect and made the changes that seemed right.
Using offset = SCM_CONTREGS (stack)->stack - SCM_BASE(stack) looks
right. The bug is probably elsewhere...
> PS. Merry Christmas!
Thanks and Merry Christmas from me to everyone as well!
(I got a high-tech electric iron in transparent iMac design from my
mom! :-)
--
GPG: D5D4E405 - 2F9B BCCC 8527 692A 04E3 331E FAF8 226A D5D4 E405
_______________________________________________
Bug-guile mailing list
Bug-guile@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guile
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: Can't make a stack from a continuation
2004-12-24 23:11 ` Neil Jerram
@ 2004-12-24 23:22 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-12-25 10:51 ` Neil Jerram
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Marius Vollmer @ 2004-12-24 23:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: bug-guile, guile-devel
Neil Jerram <neil@ossau.uklinux.net> writes:
> One more thing - are you happy with the proposed new tests for 1.6 and
> head?
Yes.
> I think one change is needed, namely to save and restore
> (debug-options) so that the effect of (debug-enable 'debug) can't
> affect other tests.
Sounds good to me, too. Could you add this?
--
GPG: D5D4E405 - 2F9B BCCC 8527 692A 04E3 331E FAF8 226A D5D4 E405
_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: Can't make a stack from a continuation
2004-12-24 23:21 ` Marius Vollmer
@ 2004-12-25 10:50 ` Neil Jerram
0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Neil Jerram @ 2004-12-25 10:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: bug-guile, guile-devel
Marius Vollmer wrote:
>
> Hmm, I didn't really try to debug your patch. I followed its idea of
> also relocating dframe->vect and made the changes that seemed right.
>
> Using offset = SCM_CONTREGS (stack)->stack - SCM_BASE(stack) looks
> right. The bug is probably elsewhere...
Fair enough, but when I compared your and my patches, they were
identical except for
- the offset calculation and storage
- two occurrences of x->id instead of x[0].id.
And I thought that mine didn't work ... Anyway, as long as yours does
work now, it's probably not worth worrying about this further; it may be
that I had an inconsistent build, or LD_LIBRARY not set properly, or
something.
Neil
_______________________________________________
Bug-guile mailing list
Bug-guile@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guile
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: Can't make a stack from a continuation
2004-12-24 23:22 ` Marius Vollmer
@ 2004-12-25 10:51 ` Neil Jerram
2004-12-27 23:23 ` Neil Jerram
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Neil Jerram @ 2004-12-25 10:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: bug-guile, guile-devel
Marius Vollmer wrote:
> Neil Jerram <neil@ossau.uklinux.net> writes:
>
>
>>One more thing - are you happy with the proposed new tests for 1.6 and
>>head?
>
>
> Yes.
>
>
>>I think one change is needed, namely to save and restore
>>(debug-options) so that the effect of (debug-enable 'debug) can't
>>affect other tests.
>
>
> Sounds good to me, too. Could you add this?
Yes, will do. Probably not today, though :-)
Neil
_______________________________________________
Bug-guile mailing list
Bug-guile@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guile
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: Can't make a stack from a continuation
2004-12-25 10:51 ` Neil Jerram
@ 2004-12-27 23:23 ` Neil Jerram
0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Neil Jerram @ 2004-12-27 23:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: bug-guile, guile-devel
Neil Jerram wrote:
>
> Yes, will do. Probably not today, though :-)
This is now complete. Two notes:
- In HEAD, I moved the new tests from eval.test to continuations.test,
as the latter seems more appropriate. (I only used eval.test in 1.6 in
order to avoid having to create a new file.)
- In 1.6, scm_t_ptrdiff is not available, so I used long instead.
Regards,
Neil
_______________________________________________
Bug-guile mailing list
Bug-guile@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guile
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-12-27 23:23 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <41A23580.6070702@ossau.uklinux.net>
2004-11-25 19:43 ` Can't make a stack from a continuation Neil Jerram
2004-12-17 1:42 ` Neil Jerram
2004-12-23 14:24 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-12-23 15:36 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-12-24 23:05 ` Neil Jerram
2004-12-24 23:11 ` Neil Jerram
2004-12-24 23:22 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-12-25 10:51 ` Neil Jerram
2004-12-27 23:23 ` Neil Jerram
2004-12-24 23:21 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-12-25 10:50 ` Neil Jerram
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).