Re: [racket-dev] stypes.h + 3M woes

2013-05-06 Thread Matthew Flatt
You're right that the comment about keys under 256 is out of date. The GC implementation should take _scheme_last_type_ into account. My initial thought is that the array needs to be bigger than that, because the intent is that new type tags can be created at run time with scheme_make_type().

Re: [racket-dev] stypes.h + 3M woes

2013-05-06 Thread Jon Zeppieri
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 8:08 AM, Matthew Flatt mfl...@cs.utah.edu wrote: If you're modifying stypes.h, though, public is not relevant. You should be able to add lots of new types to stypes.h without reaching 512 or otherwise running into GC limits, though you do need to registers traversal

Re: [racket-dev] stypes.h + 3M woes

2013-05-06 Thread Matthew Flatt
At Mon, 6 May 2013 11:58:13 -0400, Jon Zeppieri wrote: On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 8:08 AM, Matthew Flatt mfl...@cs.utah.edu wrote: If you're modifying stypes.h, though, public is not relevant. You should be able to add lots of new types to stypes.h without reaching 512 or otherwise running

[racket-dev] stypes.h + 3M woes

2013-05-05 Thread Jon Zeppieri
When I try to make a hole in the enumeration defined in stypes.h (by explicitly setting the value of a member), I get a segfault in the 3m build, though not the cgc one. Depending on where I place the hole, I've seen different stack traces. If I place the new tag before the _rt_ tags, then I get: