I'm not sure I understand what you're saying Matthew. On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Matthew Flatt <mfl...@cs.utah.edu> wrote:
> At Wed, 20 Oct 2010 07:48:20 -0700, John Clements wrote: > > > > On Oct 20, 2010, at 7:39 AM, Doug Williams wrote: > > > > > I downloaded the pre-release version this morning - 10/20 (I believe it > was > > a build from 10/16). The plot package and plot extensions in the science > > collection all work as expected. But, I am getting different numeric > answers > > for some of my science collection routines (for example, the gamma > function) > > and some of my newer code (for example, FFT) either fails with an error > > message or DrRacket just dies. All of this code uses unsafe operations > and the > > problem may lie there somewhere. I'll try digging more deeply this > evening. > > > > Focus first on uses of unsafe-vector-ref and unsafe-vector-set!. (Not the > fx > > and fl variants, just the plain ones). I wound up removing these from > the FFT > > code in order to get it to work. > > > > Check out bug PR 11264. > > > > Also, very late flash of insight: my response (getting rid of > > unsafe-vector-ref and unsafe-vector-set!) might explain my performance > issues > > with the FFT library. > > Overall, keep in mind that changes to vector contracts mean that > vectors can be wrapped with chaperones. That's why `unsafe-vector-ref' > may need to change to `unsafe-vector*-ref', and it may explain > performance differences in general. > >
_________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
