Re: Fix for 1001-local-eval-error-backtrace-segfaults - please review

[Thien-Thi Nguyen]

   From: Neil Jerram <address@hidden>
   Date: 02 May 2002 13:59:06 +0100

   -      SCM_SETCAR (SCM_CAR (env), scm_cons (n, SCM_CAR (SCM_CAR (env))));

   The copy in scm_unmemocopy, which looks as though it might be
   intended to fix this problem [...]

was this used previously?  (i'm trying to crawl inside the head of
whoever wrote it this way in the first place.)

   Fix isn't very elegant, though;
   is there a nicer way of doing this?

both the old way and the new way involve mutating some nested list
structure, so i'm guessing that doesn't play into "elegance".  i'm
wondering what is it about this fix that makes it not very elegant?

   2. Rerun of problem scenarios:

cool.  this touches upon the need to extend the testing framework to
handle interactive cases.  actually, i believe that's already possible
w/ the current framework via (ice-9 expect); the limitation really is
that all tests share an execution environment -- this is fine for the
most part, but undesirable for this kind of bug.

thi