Custom Query (1030 matches)

On moving a Lisp application to a newer Linux box, we get random, whacky behaviour. This is demonstrated by the following file:

=== process-test.lisp ===
(in-package :cl-user)

(defun big-sum (n)
  (let ((total n))
    (dotimes (i n total)
      (incf total i))))

(defun test ()
  (ccl:process-run-function "25" #'big-sum 250000000)
  (ccl:process-run-function "26" #'big-sum 260000000)
  (ccl:process-run-function "27" #'big-sum 270000000)
  (ccl:process-run-function "28" #'big-sum 280000000))

and session transcript:

$ uname -a
Linux startle 2.6.32-30-generic #59-Ubuntu SMP Tue Mar 1 21:30:21 UTC 2011 i686 GNU/Linux
$ ccl
Welcome to Clozure Common Lisp Version 1.6  (LinuxX8632)!
? (load "process-test.lisp")
#P"/home/startle/startle/process-test.lisp"
? (test)
#<PROCESS 28(5) [Reset] #x1828FA76>
? 
> Error: Fault during read of memory address #x634
> While executing: CCL::*-2, in process 26(3).


;;;
;;; #<PROCESS 26(3) [Active] #x182901B6> requires access to Shared Terminal Input
;;; Type (:y 3) to yield control to this thread.
;;;
> Error: value #<BOGUS object @ #x284E4729> is not of the expected type NUMBER.
> While executing: CCL::+-2, in process 27(4).


;;;
;;; #<PROCESS 27(4) [Active] #x1828FE16> requires access to Shared Terminal Input
;;; Type (:y 4) to yield control to this thread.
;;;
> Error: value #<Unprintable CCL::IMMEDIATE : #x34D0C3> is not of the expected type NUMBER.
> While executing: CCL::*-2, in process 28(5).


;;;
;;; #<PROCESS 28(5) [Active] #x1828FA76> requires access to Shared Terminal Input
;;; Type (:y 5) to yield control to this thread.
;;;

The exact error messages are variable. Above transcript from x86 Ubuntu 10.04 box; similar behaviour from x86 Centos 5.6. However, x86 Centos 5.3 (and earlier) does not show this, nor does Darwin/PPC (CCL 1.4).

Hi,

Is this a known bug? I don't have the expertise to describe the problem in a sensible way--I'm not even sure whether it has to do with 'do' per se--but you'll see what I mean. This is on: 1.6-r14468M (DarwinX8664)!

Line breaks added for readability:

? (setf (get 'sym1 'prop) '(this that theother))
(THIS THAT THEOTHER)
? (setf sym2 'sym1)
SYM1
? (do ((lst (symbol-plist 'sym1) (cdr lst))) 
      ((null lst) t) 
   (princ (car lst)))
PROP(THIS THAT THEOTHER)
T
? (do ((lst (symbol-plist sym2) (cdr lst))) 
      ((null lst) t) 
    (princ (car lst)))
;Compiler warnings :
;   In an anonymous lambda form at position 24: Undeclared free variable SYM2PROP(THIS THAT THEOTHER)
T
? 

Thank you for ccl, btw. It seems incredibly fast, which matters for my application.

Marshall

From pro@…:

I tried to save a supplied-p parameter from a BOA constructor like this:

(defstruct (delayed-iseq
            (:constructor iseq (start-or-end 
                                &optional (end 0 end?) (by 1)
                                strict-direction?)))
 "Delayed index sequence evaluation."
 start-or-end end end? by strict-direction?)

but SBCL complained that end? was not used. After rereading the CLHS page for defstruct, I am still not 100% sure why this is. My intepretation is that END? is an argument like any other, but probably I am not getting something.