Hi, Kevin Ryde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Actually I see the flush func of a soft port is entirely unused, it's > never called by a force-output because nothing is ever put in the port > buffer as such. The manual could be clearer about what it's supposed to > be for :-(. Maybe that's a bug, maybe it was meant to be called. We could fix this in HEAD, but maybe not in 1.8, in case programs rely on it. > At any rate, I put in the failing test below for port-for-each, and I > think flush-all could benefit from the rewrite below, just on general > principles. I agree with the latter. > +(with-test-prefix "port-for-each" > + > + ;; In guile 1.8.0 through 1.8.2, port-for-each could pass a freed cell to > + ;; its iterator func if a port was inaccessible in the last gc mark but > + ;; the lazy sweeping has not yet reached it to remove it from the port > + ;; table (scm_i_port_table). Provoking those gc conditions is a little > + ;; tricky, but the following code made it happen in 1.8.2. > + (pass-if "passing freed cell" > + (throw 'unresolved) The above line should be removed. :-) Once this line is removed, the test fails consistently here (HEAD), which is good news I suppose. > + (open-input-file "/dev/null") `(%make-void-port "r")' would have the same effect but would be more portable. Thanks, Ludovic. _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
