[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-hackers] C_substring_copy: use C_memmove instead of C_memcp
From: |
Peter Bex |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-hackers] C_substring_copy: use C_memmove instead of C_memcpy |
Date: |
Mon, 30 Jun 2014 21:30:49 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.4.2.3i |
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 03:02:06PM +0000, Mario Domenech Goulart wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Please, review the attached patch. It should fix #1135, which is
> related to string-copy! and affects at least the gap-buffer egg.
Thank you, Mario! This patch is good, and I've pushed it as-is,
and cherry-picked it to the stability branch.
We discussed this on IRC for a bit, I've noticed that there are
some other incorrect uses of memcpy in the core code. We attempted
to make a patch but that didn't work out so well.
I've looked into this a little more, but I guess I inadvertently opened
a can of worms: I added optimization to the lolevel-tests.scm
compilation, so the possibly bogus rewrite for move-memory! gets
exercised. Then I saw that there's another rewrite elsewhere
that uses the w2b macro that doesn't exist, so I replaced it with
the C_bytes macro which does exist (and the use in lolevel.scm as
well, where it _is_ available).
But then I ran into another weird crash in the object-become! test,
so I decided I should look into this another time, and created the
ticket #1136 for it.
Cheers,
Peter
--
http://www.more-magic.net