[armedbear-devel] Changes to CHANGES

[Alan Ruttenberg]

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 6:47 PM, Alessio Stalla <alessiostalla at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 5:09 PM, Alessio Stalla <alessiostalla at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 11:25 AM, Mark Evenson <evenson at panix.com> wrote:
>>> 1)  Alessio's recent work on lambda inlining.  In my opinion we have to address the bug Alan Ruttenberg has found or backout these changes before release.
>>
>> I've been silent on the issue, but that doesn't mean I'm not working on it :)
>> I still haven't been able to find out what's wrong, but there's a
>> potential clue. My changes break one ANSI test, apparently because I
>> do a copy-tree I shouldn't do. (without the copy-tree the compiler
>> crashed, so I need to pinpoint exactly what and when to copy). That
>> may be unrelated with Alan's bug, but nevertheless I'll try to fix it.
>> I have the feeling, not backed out by actual evidence, that Alan's bug
>> is related only to the runtime compiler, which somewhat suggests that
>> that copy-tree might have something to do with it as well.
>> So, stay tuned. And in case I don't solve it in time for the release,
>> no problem - it's easy to disable the optimization without reverting
>> anything.
>
> I think I've fixed it. It was indeed a copy-tree, but not the one I
> thought (incidentally that one was only in my local copy, probably
> left over from a previous experiment). In one case the expanded
> function body shared structure with the form that generated the lambda
> call, and with compiler macros, like in Alan's case, that's really
> bad, as the code of the compiler macro gets destructively modified by
> the compilation process (at least, in my understanding), so I added a
> copy-tree for the function body. I'm not completely sure that
> copy-tree isn't copying too much, but it was already used in other
> places for the same thing before my changes. It seems now that
> read-obo works like it should, and the ANSI tests still pass, so I
> committed the change. Still, since it was quite a challenge for me to
> fix it, and it left me almost in a catatonic state :D, I may have
> missed something: please check that your code still works after the
> commit.

Just tested my code. Looks good. Thanks for the brain cells!
-Alan