Re: [Bug-apl] Segmentation fault causes GNU APL version 1.5-1 AMD64 to exit

uld be the most current source. If that's wrong, > please enlighten me. > > > -- > *From:* Blake McBride > *Sent:* Sunday, January 3, 2016 9:30 AM > *To:* Rick Mayforth > *Cc:* Juergen Sauermann; bug-apl@gnu.org > *Subject:* Re: [Bug-apl]

Re: [Bug-apl] Segmentation fault causes GNU APL version 1.5-1 AMD64 to exit

__ From: Blake McBride Sent: Sunday, January 3, 2016 9:30 AM To: Rick Mayforth Cc: Juergen Sauermann; bug-apl@gnu.org Subject: Re: [Bug-apl] Segmentation fault causes GNU APL version 1.5-1 AMD64 to exit On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 8:48 AM, Rick Mayforth mailto:gri...@msn.com>> wrote:

Re: [Bug-apl] Segmentation fault causes GNU APL version 1.5-1 AMD64 to exit

On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Juergen Sauermann < juergen.sauerm...@t-online.de> wrote: > Hi, > > yes, looks like this was fixed in *SVN 10607*. > > I have the 1.6 (or should it be 2.0 ?) release of GNU APL on my TODO list, > but was too lazy to do it. > My vote is for 1.6. 2.0, for me, woul

Re: [Bug-apl] Segmentation fault causes GNU APL version 1.5-1 AMD64 to exit

Hi, yes, looks like this was fixed in SVN 10607. I have the 1.6 (or should it be 2.0 ?) release of GNU APL on my TODO list, but was too lazy to do it. Nevertheless, thank you, Rick, for reporting this. /// Jürgen

Re: [Bug-apl] Segmentation fault causes GNU APL version 1.5-1 AMD64 to exit

On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 8:48 AM, Rick Mayforth wrote: > ... > I got these errors running the Debian *GNU-APL* package, then did the > full compile from apl-1.5.tar.gz dated 3/29/15 from ftp.gnu.org > and ran gdb as you suggested. The following resulted > on the virtual machine

Re: [Bug-apl] Segmentation fault causes GNU APL version 1.5-1 AMD64 to exit

rmann Sent: Saturday, January 2, 2016 7:55 AM To: Blake McBride; Rick Mayforth Cc: bug-apl@gnu.org Subject: Re: [Bug-apl] Segmentation fault causes GNU APL version 1.5-1 AMD64 to exit Hi, I am currently trying to reproduce the fault, but was not yet able to. Like in Blake's case, 1500x1500 work

Re: [Bug-apl] Segmentation fault causes GNU APL version 1.5-1 AMD64 to exit

Actually the stack size is limited. It's the heap that is not. For C and C++ applications you can set the desired stack size during linking. There is a flag for it but since I'm on mobile right now it's a bit of a hassle to check right now. Regards, Elias On 2 Jan 2016 11:01 p.m., "Juergen Sauerma

Re: [Bug-apl] Segmentation fault causes GNU APL version 1.5-1 AMD64 to exit

Hi Blake, as of now I suspect the problem is not a too small ⎕WA, but a too large automatic variable on the stack. General problem in *nix-like OSes is that they (in practice) never run out of space but begin swapping instead. And we alre

Re: [Bug-apl] Segmentation fault causes GNU APL version 1.5-1 AMD64 to exit

Hi Juergen, Just a thought, perhaps you can change a parameter in GNU APL (for local testing purposes only) to force a small ⎕wa so that you can simulate the problem and do so more quickly. Thanks. Blake On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 7:55 AM, Juergen Sauermann < juergen.sauerm...@t-online.de> wrote:

Re: [Bug-apl] Segmentation fault causes GNU APL version 1.5-1 AMD64 to exit

Hi, I am currently trying to reproduce the fault, but was not yet able to. Like in Blake's case, 1500x1500 worked on my machine. I am currently trying 4000x4000 but that hasn't finished yet (takes ages). The _expression_ that I am using i

Re: [Bug-apl] Segmentation fault causes GNU APL version 1.5-1 AMD64 to exit

Just for reference, I tried your example with the head of the source code repository, and I got: $ apl a←1500 1500⍴?(1500×1500)⍴10 ⎕wa 732487680 b←⌹a )off However, since your ⎕wa was substantially less than mine, it may be that you ran out of RAM and I didn't. Also, what

[Bug-apl] Segmentation fault causes GNU APL version 1.5-1 AMD64 to exit

The following sequence caused the fault. APL exits. The interpreter is running under Debian 8 in a VMWare virtual machine with 2GB RAM & 880MB swap space. One would expect a WS FULL or some other APL error in this instance rather than a forced exit, no? a?1500 1500 ? ?(1500×1500)?10 ?wa