freenode/#sbcl - IRC Chatlog
Search
11:42:04
scymtym
i have two changes for sb-sprof. which should go in during the freeze? 1) fix for the regression reported by dougk__ 2) a tertiary sorting criterion that amounts to x before y <=> y is a transitive caller of x (ignoring mutual recursion). i originally added 2) to fix unstable sorting in the report while comparing the old and new behavior. now i think 2) may be generally useful
11:44:55
scymtym
ok, i'm pushing both changes then. the previous code changes combined with unstable sorting would have caused user-visible ordering changes anyway. might as well produce a more predictable ordering instead
11:46:58
scymtym
just to be clear: i'm only talking about the ordering of nodes whose sample count is identical. otherwise, there has already been a predictable ordering
12:35:04
scymtym
Xof: ok, pushed. replying to sbcl-devel now. maybe the original reporter can test the fix
16:42:54
corci
Project sbcl-master-windows » Windows_7_64bit build #2205: FAILURE in 2 min 46 sec: http://ci.cor-lab.de/job/sbcl-master-windows/label=Windows_7_64bit/2205/
16:42:55
corci
Project sbcl-master-windows » Windows_7_32bit build #2205: FAILURE in 2 min 47 sec: http://ci.cor-lab.de/job/sbcl-master-windows/label=Windows_7_32bit/2205/
17:18:27
corci
Project sbcl-master-windows » Windows_7_32bit build #2206: FIXED in 35 min: http://ci.cor-lab.de/job/sbcl-master-windows/label=Windows_7_32bit/2206/
17:19:13
corci
Project sbcl-master-windows » Windows_7_64bit build #2206: FIXED in 35 min: http://ci.cor-lab.de/job/sbcl-master-windows/label=Windows_7_64bit/2206/
22:00:55
stassats
ok, it clearly zero fills the wrong thing, but zero filling the right (or more right) thing is still breaking it (differently, though)
23:16:11
dougk_
stassats: i'll answer you that if you answer me something - do we or don't we use type information of a function that is declaimed notinline?
23:16:28
dougk_
google has nasty code that defuns a function that can't return, then changes its definition at runtime to one that can return
23:16:56
dougk_
http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Body/03_bbc.htm says that declaiming it notinline should remove the assumption that it's the same function
23:17:48
dougk_
me either. So I get that "A call within a file to a named function that is defined in the same file refers to that function," but we're using the loophole "unless that function has been declared notinline." which stopped working