Peter Bex writes:
> The attached patch is an updated version which also changes the
> implementation of C_copy_ptr_memory to use memmove().
I have pushed this version to master and stability/4.9.0.
Thank you!
Christian
___
Chicken-hackers mailing l
On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 02:08:11PM +0200, Peter Bex wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Here's a simple patch for #1136, which is more-or-less the same bug as
> the one pointed out by Mario for string-copy!, but for move-memory!
> There's a second bug in the type specialisation for move-memory!: it
> would expan
>> I'm unsure how to fix this. Is it fixable at all? Is it worth fixing?
>
> The only thing I can think of is for the scrutinizer to pre-check for
> a call to object-become! and disable itself. The trouble is that the
> effects may be pervasive to anywhere in the code, given the power of
> call
Peter Bex scripsit:
> I'm unsure how to fix this. Is it fixable at all? Is it worth fixing?
The only thing I can think of is for the scrutinizer to pre-check for
a call to object-become! and disable itself. The trouble is that the
effects may be pervasive to anywhere in the code, given the pow
Hi all,
Here's a simple patch for #1136, which is more-or-less the same bug as
the one pointed out by Mario for string-copy!, but for move-memory!
There's a second bug in the type specialisation for move-memory!: it
would expand to C_w2b(), which is a macro which was defined locally to
lolevel.scm
