Hello,
Thanks for the report. The failure is:
FAIL: gc.test: gc: Lexical vars are collectable
Unfortunately, this test exercises the garbage collector, and its
failure does not always indicate a problem.
Since this is the only GC-related failure here, I would ignore it.
So I’m closing the b
Hi Daniel,
Daniel Llorens skribis:
> Compare
>
> (define f (lambda (a) a))
> (call-with-values (lambda () (values 3 3)) f)
>
> vs
>
> (call-with-values (lambda () (values 3 3)) (lambda (a) a))
>
> The first one fails with
>
> :1:0: In procedure f:
> :1:0: Wrong number of arguments to #
>
> The
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 22-03-13 13:48, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Thanks for the report. The failure is:
>
> FAIL: gc.test: gc: Lexical vars are collectable
>
> Unfortunately, this test exercises the garbage collector, and its
> failure does not always indic
Marijn writes:
> On 22-03-13 13:48, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for the report. The failure is:
>>
>> FAIL: gc.test: gc: Lexical vars are collectable
>>
>> Unfortunately, this test exercises the garbage collector, and its
>> failure does not always indicate a problem.
>>
>> Since th
Mark H Weaver skribis:
> Marijn writes:
[...]
>> Can I just add that a failing test that doesn't indicate a problem is
>> rather annoying. Can this specific test be removed or disabled if it
>> can't be improved?
>
> I agree. If we're going to ignore these failures (which seems
> reasonable),
Hey, there. I was asked to provide this information to you by the
guilefriends in Freenode #guile. This code segfaults and I've been having
trouble figuring out why.
I'm running Ubuntu 12.10 i686 and I'm happy to help any way I can if you
need any more information. Please forgive me if I'm doing a
