search for: r84032

...adenSwallow because it doesn't do tail calls? There's also some minor breakage which isn't TCO-related (four failed checks in the Pure interpreter) when reenabling lazy compilation with DisableLazyCompilation(false). These seem to go all the way back to your commit of Nick's patch (r84032 = "Keep track of stubs that are created" fails exactly the same checks, while r84031 is fine). Those four Pure checks all involve anonymous closures (lambdas); I still need to look at Nick's patch to figure out what exactly is going on there. Now I might be able to live without lazy...

...oesn't do tail calls? > > There's also some minor breakage which isn't TCO-related (four failed > checks in the Pure interpreter) when reenabling lazy compilation with > DisableLazyCompilation(false). These seem to go all the way back to your > commit of Nick's patch (r84032 = "Keep track of stubs that are created" > fails exactly the same checks, while r84031 is fine). Those four Pure > checks all involve anonymous closures (lambdas); I still need to look at > Nick's patch to figure out what exactly is going on there. > > Now I might be ab...

On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 2:19 AM, Albert Graef <Dr.Graef at t-online.de> wrote: > Jon Harrop wrote: >> I've come up with the following minimal repro that segfaults on my machine: > > Jon, were you able to resolve this? > > FWIW, TOT is causing all kinds of weird segfaults related to tail calls > in my Pure interpreter, too (at least on x86-64). In my case these

Jon Harrop wrote: > I've come up with the following minimal repro that segfaults on my machine: Jon, were you able to resolve this? FWIW, TOT is causing all kinds of weird segfaults related to tail calls in my Pure interpreter, too (at least on x86-64). In my case these seem to be limited to the JIT, however (batch-compiled Pure programs via opt+llc all work fine, even with TCO), so