At Fri, 3 Aug 2012 20:51:37 -0400, Greg Hendershott wrote: > 1. Bad news: The reqs/sec seem much lower than before. i.e. Does the > bug fix have a performance hit?
That's not expected. It's possible that the broken version took shortcuts that happened to work out much of the time, but I'm not sure. > 2. Good news: The "input port closed" error seemed to be gone with > 5.3.0.16. Except ... > > 3. Bad news: I just got it to happen again, with 5.3.0.16: I see how that could happen, and I've pushed a repair --- mostly by improving the guarantees about progress evts. (I think it's too late to include this repair in v5.3, though.) ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
