Marius Vollmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I have seen this intermittently as well (for example, compiling > without optimization would give a stack overflow when launching into > the repl, but compiling with optimization would not). Maybe the > default stack limit is dangerously close to what we need to survive...
Looks like gcc 4 unoptimized uses a lot more stack in ceval than previous versions, in the head 976 bytes vs 284 with gcc 3.3. Or in 1.6 similar 688 up from 288. Maybe every variable gets its own stack slot, even when they're in separate blocks. I guess it's a case of don't do that (unoptimize), or increase the stack limit if you do. _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
