From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?=) Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: `scm_c_read ()' and `swap_buffer' trick harmful Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2008 21:25:27 +0100 Message-ID: <87myerdia0.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87vduo92nj.fsf@gnu.org> <49dd78620811200522k315281c8m9d952a17145b2479@mail.gmail.com> <871vx6ik42.fsf@gnu.org> <49dd78620811201425j5dcd7e0g4165c8ea4c6b08ce@mail.gmail.com> <87fxllt3f7.fsf@gnu.org> <49dd78620811231430o5f0d6dc7u16c2fbf29b73c57c@mail.gmail.com> <20081219144446.GC20162@localhost> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1229718366 1901 80.91.229.12 (19 Dec 2008 20:26:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2008 20:26:06 +0000 (UTC) To: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Dec 19 21:27:11 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LDlwE-0002tz-3C for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 19 Dec 2008 21:27:10 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50755 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LDlv1-00075s-MK for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 19 Dec 2008 15:25:55 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LDluw-00075d-5n for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Dec 2008 15:25:50 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LDlut-00075O-Lt for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Dec 2008 15:25:48 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=59384 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LDlut-00075L-FI for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Dec 2008 15:25:47 -0500 Original-Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:42309 helo=ciao.gmane.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LDlut-00070k-0j for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Dec 2008 15:25:47 -0500 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1LDluo-0007gx-79 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Dec 2008 20:25:42 +0000 Original-Received: from reverse-83.fdn.fr ([80.67.176.83]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 19 Dec 2008 20:25:42 +0000 Original-Received: from ludo by reverse-83.fdn.fr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 19 Dec 2008 20:25:42 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 39 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: reverse-83.fdn.fr X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 29 Frimaire an 217 de la =?iso-8859-1?Q?R=E9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0xEA52ECF4 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 821D 815D 902A 7EAB 5CEE D120 7FBA 3D4F EB1F 5364 X-OS: i686-pc-linux-gnu User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.3 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:Qqi2qJ2yj2u1i2ALrLsW2aYIDn8= X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:7936 Archived-At: Hello, Miroslav Lichvar writes: > On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 10:30:19PM +0000, Neil Jerram wrote: >> 2008/11/21 Ludovic Courtès : >> > I confirm it works with CBIPs in Guile-R6RS-Libs, but I had to make this >> > small change: >> > >> > http://repo.or.cz/w/guile-r6rs-libs.git?a=commitdiff;h=dfab2fe21f82bc40cfdf9a3a3eeb6936d5935c8c >> > >> > IOW, with Guile up to 1.8.5, it was harmless to leave `read_buf_size' >> > uninitialized (actually, zeroed), which was OK since CBIPs don't use it, >> > but the change in `scm_c_read ()' makes it necessary to initialize it. >> > It's probably a reasonable expectation, though. >> >> Hmm. I agree that this isn't ideal. I guess it's OK for now though. >> >> > Please commit! >> >> Thanks, doing that now. > > It seems that the optimizations broke lilypond, it's now failing with > this message: > > ports.c:978: scm_fill_input: Assertion `pt->read_pos == pt->read_end' failed. Ouch! > A bug report is here: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477007 Can you get a full C backtrace? A quick grep reveals that Lilypond does not create any custom port type, which isn't reassuring... Thanks, Ludo'.