Re: Mac PowerBookG4 OS X 10.4.11 (Tiger) guile test results

[Roger Mc Murtrie]

Yuk!    SORRY
I just noticed this is to do with PowerBookG4 although the Subject  
couldn't be more obvious.
I have been responding with Intel activities!
I'll fire up the PowerBookG4 and have another go>

Roger

On 11/01/2008, at 9:40 AM, Neil Jerram wrote:

> Roger Mc Murtrie <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > Still fails with 40000:
>
> Yes, but not because of stack overflow.  So the doubling of the stack
> size was successful.
>
> > sizeof long: 4
>
> As hoped.  The point is that most of the data that Guile puts on the C
> stack are pointers or pointer-like.  Hence the size of the stack (for
> a given operation) on a 64-bit OS will be almost twice the size on a
> 32-bit OS.
>
> But the max stack size that Guile allows is the value of the "stack"
> debug option multiplied by sizeof(long), and it seems that
> sizeof(long) is the same on 64-bit OSs (or at least on yours) as on
> 32-bit.
>
> I think a good fix would be to replace uses of SCM_STACK_LIMIT by
> (SCM_STACK_LIMIT * sizeof(SCM)) / sizeof(SCM_STACKITEM).  (And then
> the 20000 -> 40000 change can should be reverted.)  Patch (against
> 1.8.x CVS) is below.  Opinions?
>
> > /Users/Roger/Downloads/guile-1.8.3/srfi/srfi-1.scm:223:1: In  
> > procedure
> > dynamic-link in expression (load-extension "libguile-srfi-srfi-1-v-3"
> > "scm_init_srfi_1"):
> > /Users/Roger/Downloads/guile-1.8.3/srfi/srfi-1.scm:223:1: file:
> > "libguile-srfi-srfi-1-v-3", message: "dlopen(libguile-srfi-srfi-1-
> > v-3.a, 9): no suitable image found.  Did find:
>
> This problem is just another occurrence of the dlopen issue.
>
>    Neil
>
>
> Index: libguile/stackchk.h
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvsroot/guile/guile/guile-core/libguile/stackchk.h,v
> retrieving revision 1.20.2.1
> diff -u -r1.20.2.1 stackchk.h
> --- libguile/stackchk.h 12 Feb 2006 13:42:51 -0000      1.20.2.1
> +++ libguile/stackchk.h 10 Jan 2008 22:37:38 -0000
> @@ -37,11 +37,11 @@
> # if SCM_STACK_GROWS_UP
> #  define SCM_STACK_OVERFLOW_P(s)\
>    (SCM_STACK_PTR (s) \
> -    > (SCM_I_CURRENT_THREAD->base + SCM_STACK_LIMIT))
> +    > (SCM_I_CURRENT_THREAD->base + ((SCM_STACK_LIMIT *  
> sizeof(SCM)) / sizeof(SCM_STACKITEM)))
> # else
> #  define SCM_STACK_OVERFLOW_P(s)\
>    (SCM_STACK_PTR (s) \
> -    < (SCM_I_CURRENT_THREAD->base - SCM_STACK_LIMIT))
> +    < (SCM_I_CURRENT_THREAD->base - ((SCM_STACK_LIMIT *  
> sizeof(SCM)) / sizeof(SCM_STACKITEM))))
> # endif
> # define SCM_CHECK_STACK\
>     {\