On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 03:59:05 -0800, elizabeth wrote:
> > On 22 Feb 2017, at 12:41, jn...@jnthn.net via RT <perl6-bugs-
> > follo...@perl.org> wrote:
> > On Sat, 30 Apr 2016 03:42:00 -0700, alex.jakime...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> OK, I said that it only segfaults on 32-bit systems, but I was
> >> wrong.
> >> Code:
> >> 42 xx (2 ** 62)
> >> Result:
> >> Segmentation fault
> > This is patched in MoarVM HEAD just now and no longer SEGVs (reports
> > the array is too long to allocate). So, no longer a SEGV bug.
> > However, I'm a bit surprised that xx does not work lazily, and
> > actually makes such a huge array up-front. Not sure if we want to re-
> > purpose the ticket for that; I'll remove the SEGV from the title,
> > however, since that is resolved.
> Ah, yes, I remember we discussed this. I’ll make it a Seq, although
> the question then becomes: should it be lazy or not? If it is not
> lazy, we would just be postponing the exception in some cases.
Fixed with commit