mandelbug whit GUILE_DEBUG_MALLOC

[Marco Maggi]

Ciao,

just for the record, because I think that it is
unlikely that I or someone will succeed in fixing it.

It appears to me that there
is a problem in 'scm_malloc_reregister()', file
"libguile/debug-memory.c", which is invoked by
'scm_gc_realloc()' only when Guile is compiled
with 'GUILE_DEBUG_MALLOC' defined.

It tells me that I am trying to reallocate a block
with a different "what" string.

It comes and goes, but for the small code
evolution span in which it was reproducible: I was
able to determine that I was using the same
"what".

I circumvented it, it seems, by using the same
"what" in two different invocations to
"scm_gc_realloc()".

Understanding what is going on requirers
understanding the hash table handling, which is
a little mess IMHO, and it is above my head now.

--
Marco Maggi

"Now feel the funk blast!"
Rage Against the Machine - "Calm like a bomb"




___
Bug-guile mailing list
Bug-guile@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guile

[bug #21483] mandelbug whit GUILE_DEBUG_MALLOC

[Neil Jerram]

URL:
  

 Summary: mandelbug whit GUILE_DEBUG_MALLOC
 Project: Guile
Submitted by: ossau
Submitted on: Wednesday 10/31/07 at 00:31
Category: None
Severity: 3 - Normal
  Item Group: None
  Status: None
 Privacy: Public
 Assigned to: None
 Open/Closed: Open
 Discussion Lock: Any

___

Details:

Ciao,

just for the record, because I think that it is
unlikely that I or someone will succeed in fixing it.

It appears to me that there
is a problem in 'scm_malloc_reregister()', file
"libguile/debug-memory.c", which is invoked by
'scm_gc_realloc()' only when Guile is compiled
with 'GUILE_DEBUG_MALLOC' defined.

It tells me that I am trying to reallocate a block
with a different "what" string.

It comes and goes, but for the small code
evolution span in which it was reproducible: I was
able to determine that I was using the same
"what".

I circumvented it, it seems, by using the same
"what" in two different invocations to
"scm_gc_realloc()".

Understanding what is going on requirers
understanding the hash table handling, which is
a little mess IMHO, and it is above my head now. 

-- 
Marco Maggi





___

Reply to this item at:

  

___
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/



___
Bug-guile mailing list
Bug-guile@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guile

[bug #20941] Modules interact badly with macros

[Neil Jerram]

Update of bug #20941 (project guile):

  Status:None => Invalid

___

Follow-up Comment #1:

Is this causing real trouble for you?

>From the practical point of view, isn't it straightforward just to export any
procedures that are used by the syntax expansion, as well as exporting the
syntax itself?

>From the conformance point of view, there is no case to answer, since R5RS
doesn't specify a module system.

If we in future implement a module or library system according to some
external standard (e.g. R6RS or ERR5RS), and that system specifies that the
procedures should not need exporting, in cases like this, then we will have to
make sure that Guile follows that specification.

For now, however, it seems reasonable just to document that any procedures
used by a syntax expansion must also be exported.

Do you agree?  If you do, I'll look at updating the manual.

___

Reply to this item at:

  

___
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/



___
Bug-guile mailing list
Bug-guile@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guile