From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 117542 invoked by alias); 12 Feb 2016 01:26:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact kawa-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: kawa-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 117520 invoked by uid 89); 12 Feb 2016 01:26:28 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=needless X-HELO: aibo.runbox.com Received: from aibo.runbox.com (HELO aibo.runbox.com) (91.220.196.211) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 12 Feb 2016 01:26:27 +0000 Received: from [10.9.9.206] (helo=mailfront02.runbox.com) by bars.runbox.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aU2V4-0004Eu-Uc; Fri, 12 Feb 2016 02:26:23 +0100 Received: from 70-36-239-75.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com ([70.36.239.75] helo=toshie.bothner.com) by mailfront02.runbox.com with esmtpsa (uid:757155 ) (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.76) id 1aU2V4-0007Za-5O; Fri, 12 Feb 2016 02:26:22 +0100 Subject: Re: How do i debug --no-inline or --full-tailcalls options? To: OKUMURA Yuki , kawa@sourceware.org References: From: Per Bothner Message-ID: <56BD34BB.40002@bothner.com> Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 01:26:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-q1/txt/msg00011.txt.bz2 On 02/11/2016 12:51 AM, OKUMURA Yuki wrote: > EXAMPLE1: --full-tailcalls > (https://github.com/okuoku/yuni/issues/33) > > Following program requires --full-tailcalls to run with "java > kawa.repl -r7rs prog.sps". > Otherwise, Kawa gives java.lang.VerifyError. > > (import (scheme base)) > > (define (ssplit-parse-byte0-ORIG byte) > (case byte > ((NONE) (values 'NONE #f)) > (else (values 'OTHERS #f)))) > > Why do we need --full-tailcalls here? > Removing CASE should compile fine so I guess there's something > different around (scheme base) > exported VALUES procedure here.. I've checked in a fix for this, but I'm not satisfied with it. Or rather: The fix is fine, but there is some needless code generated by the compiler. I know how to fix that - but then that causes other problems I'm still working on. -- --Per Bothner per@bothner.com http://per.bothner.com/