GNU bug report logs - #13101
Crash compiling big cond expression

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 13101 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 13101 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: rixed <at> happyleptic.org
To: bug-guile <at> gnu.org
Subject: Crash compiling big cond expression
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 17:01:24 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

I tried to factorize somewhat the previous expression (Cf http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=13088)
and hit a bug in compiler: first it runs for a very long time then throw:

;;; ERROR: In procedure instruction-length: Wrong type argument in position 1 (expecting INSTRUCTION_P): ((long-local-set 1 0))

Attached is the program that triggers this behavior.

[bug2.scm (text/plain, attachment)]

Message #8 received at 13101 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: David Kastrup <dak <at> gnu.org>
To: 13101 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Probably duplicate
Date: Sun, 11 May 2014 20:17:51 +0200

I think this may be related to issue #17147
<URL:http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=17147> as a problem of
scale for syntax-case or similar mechanisms.

-- 
David Kastrup

Message #11 received at 13101 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Mark H Weaver <mhw <at> netris.org>
To: David Kastrup <dak <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 13101 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#13101: Probably duplicate
Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2014 21:00:25 -0400

David Kastrup <dak <at> gnu.org> writes:
> I think this may be related to issue #17147
> <URL:http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=17147> as a problem of
> scale for syntax-case or similar mechanisms.

No, it's totally unrelated.

This bug has to do with limitations arising from fixed-width bit fields
used in the stack VM.  I don't think there's any reasonable way we can
fix this in 2.0, but I believe the situation will be improved in 2.2.

      Mark

Message #16 received at 13101-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Mark H Weaver <mhw <at> netris.org>
To: rixed <at> happyleptic.org
Cc: 13101-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#13101: Crash compiling big cond expression
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2014 19:10:28 -0400

Hi,

I believe this scalability problem is fixed on the master branch of
Guile, which will become Guile 2.2.  The master branch successfully
compiles the example you provided in <http://bugs.gnu.org/13101>.

I don't think we can reasonably fix it in 2.0.x.

I'm closing this bug now, but feel free to reopen it if you still see
problems along these lines on the master branch.

     Thanks!
       Mark

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.