Andy Wingo <wi...@pobox.com> writes: > On Fri 22 May 2009 17:10, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: >> Andy Wingo <wi...@pobox.com> writes: >> >>> I'm catching up with mail. On my syncase-in-boot-9 branch, I enabled >>> compilation of srfi-18 and fixed a bug in it regarding multiple-value >>> returns. Now I just ran the srfi-18 test like 100 times in a row and it >>> didn't show any strange errors. Yaaaay! >> >> What kind of "strange errors" would it lead to before? > > Random ones based on races, as code was lazily memoized from multiple > threads at once.
OK (I thought you were referring to errors related to multiple-value returns.) Then, indeed, yaay! > Indeed. The VM truncates multiple values, but here we were doing a (let > ((x (values))) something x), which returned 0 values to a continuation > needing a value, raising a valid error. Fixed that in the original > source code. > > In addition, we were sometimes getting 0 values in a for-effect context, > which the GHIL->GLIL compiler didn't support. Like this: > > (begin (call/cc (lambda (k) (k))) 10) > > I've fixed this in the tree-il->glil compiler. Thanks for the explanation. Ludo'.
