Hi Neil all,
On Mon 30 Mar 2009 22:43, Neil Jerram n...@ossau.uklinux.net writes:
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
#!/bin/sh
# -*- scheme -*-
exec ${GUILE-guile} -e '(@ (scripts compile) compile)' -s $0 $@
!#
FWIW, I think this kind of incantation is really horrible. Ditto for
usage
Hi Neil,
On Tue 31 Mar 2009 15:47, Neil Jerram n...@ossau.uklinux.net writes:
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
#!/usr/bin/env guile -e
but we all know the problem with that.
Only one argument being portably supported? (I _think_ that's the
problem, but I'm not so sure that I
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
Hi Neil,
Hi Andy,
On Mon 30 Mar 2009 13:43, Neil Jerram n...@ossau.uklinux.net writes:
FWIW, I think this kind of incantation is really horrible. Ditto for
usage of guile-tools What kind of a scripting language is it
that needs to be bootstrapped by
Hi Neil,
On Mon 30 Mar 2009 13:43, Neil Jerram n...@ossau.uklinux.net writes:
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
Hey Guilers,
Hi Andy,
In summary, I'm not sure I'm following the logic here...
The recent commit to compile with the stack calibration file
From: Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com
So I have a proposal. We should set the stack limit to 60k words.
I always set the stack limit higher, so that I can run a version
that has been compiled without optimization, for the sake of
GDB.
-Mike Gran
Hi Neil,
Neil Jerram [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
imagine cinematic thinking effect
Goodness, that Ludovic, can't he ever just be happy with what I've proposed...
Eh eh, I'm starting to have a reputation! ;-)
I did think you may be annoyed by that review after all the work you had
put it, but
Hello,
Neil Jerram [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore
index a122176..39c4b49 100644
--- a/.gitignore
+++ b/.gitignore
@@ -70,3 +70,4 @@ guile-readline/guile-readline-config.h
guile-readline/guile-readline-config.h.in
TAGS
guile-1.8.pc
2008/10/12 Neil Jerram [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Here's the new patch. Please (as ever!) let me know what you think.
One update to this below. It isn't actually necessary or helpful, for
this case, to pull in the GOOPS interface to evaluator traps.
Neil
diff --git a/libguile/measure-hwm.scm
Hi Ludovic,
2008/10/11 Ludovic Courtès [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The approach looks good to me. It's just annoying that
`SCM_CHECK_STACK' (adding a slight overhead) and threads.h have to be
modified.
Instead of storing the high water mark in threads, could we have
`%get-stack-depth' and call it
:11:01 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Stack calibration mark 3
---
.gitignore |1 +
check-guile.in |1 +
configure.in |2 +
libguile/Makefile.am | 23 ++
libguile/measure-hwm.scm
On 10/10/2008, Greg Troxel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am not really following, but does this make it harder to cross-compile
guile than it is now?
I don't think so. In the Guile build, 'make' already executes the
built guile in order to generate the online help
(guile-procedures.txt). With
Neil Jerram [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 10/10/2008, Greg Troxel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am not really following, but does this make it harder to cross-compile
guile than it is now?
I don't think so. In the Guile build, 'make' already executes the
built guile in order to generate the
Hi Ludo,
OK, here's my next attempt at a solution for this problem. :-)
Compared to the previous stack calibration patch/approach, the main
points of this one are that
- it uses a much larger amount of executed code to calibrate stack
usage: specifically, all the code involved in starting up
Hello,
Sorry for the latency...
Neil Jerram [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
FWIW, I'm actually thinking now that this stack calibration stuff is
becoming way too tricky, in at least two ways.
1) The concept of the 'stack debug option being expressed in terms of
some other canonical combination
Heya,
Neil, I'd love to try your patches, can you push to a branch?
Andy
2008/10/2 Andy Wingo [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Heya,
Neil, I'd love to try your patches, can you push to a branch?
Andy
Sure, but I'm not yet familiar with how to do that. I already have a
local stack-calibration branch; if you already know the incantation
for just pushing that to savannah
is expected to provide a
`UGUILE_FOR_BUILD' at configure-time, which is then used to run
`calibrate.scm'; however, `UGUILE_FOR_BUILD' runs on the host, not the
target system, so the generated file will be erroneous, right?
Probably, yes.
Thus, when cross-compiling, shouldn't we avoid stack calibration
2008/9/28 Ludovic Courtès [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
One last thing...
Neil Jerram [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
@@ -81,6 +106,15 @@ scm_stack_report ()
void
scm_init_stackchk ()
{
+#ifdef GUILE_CALIBRATION_MEASURED_DEPTH_1
+ /* Calculate calibrated stack depth limit. */
+ calibrated_m =
of `calibrated_m' needs more casts to `double' I
think.
+ if (scm_is_true (debugp) !SCM_UNBNDP (debugp))
+{
+ scm_puts (;; Stack calibration: (x1 x2 y1 y2 m c) = ,
+ scm_current_output_port ());
+ scm_write (scm_list_n (scm_from_int (x1), scm_from_int (x2
19 matches
Mail list logo
