On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 01:04:23PM +0100, Jörg F. Wittenberger wrote: > Am 21.02.2016 um 19:52 schrieb Peter Bex: > > On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 07:43:06PM +0100, Jörg F. Wittenberger wrote: > >> Hi folks, > >> > >> IMHO the patch in > >> http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/chicken-hackers/2016-02/msg00032.html > >> SHOULD be applied - it fixes a serious bug. > > > > This is a very invasive change. Do you have a test case that shows > > how this breaks? > > In practice: yes I do. Right here.[1]
Without a self-contained simple test program I think it's more productive to make a release now, and then start focusing on fixing the scheduler for 4.12/5.0. As far as I can tell, this has been broken since the beginning, so we wouldn't be releasing a CHICKEN with more bugs than earlier versions. I've done some tests and I was able to get strange behaviour from the scheduler, see http://paste.call-cc.org/paste?id=d9e4c5b8f8473fd1114dcec56c9c8a079b252362 However, none of these behaved any different under CHICKEN 4.9.0.1 or 4.10.0, so it's not strictly speaking a regression that MUST be fixed before 4.11. All this suggests that we need to take another serious look at the scheduler, but it also means we'll likely need to make very invasive changes which could cause even more breakage before we get everything completely fixed. That would at least push a release much further down the year, at our current pace (especially since we're diluting our efforts by also working on CHICKEN 5 in parallel). Cheers, Peter
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Chicken-hackers mailing list Chicken-hackers@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers