No, but that was a good idea, so I checked it. It doesn't happen in 5.3.6.
Neil ⊥
On 12/30/2013 09:14 PM, Robby Findler wrote:
I assume you checked and it doesn't happen in 5.3.6?
Robby
On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Neil Toronto mailto:neil.toro...@gmail.com>> wrote:
We really should
I assume you checked and it doesn't happen in 5.3.6?
Robby
On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Neil Toronto wrote:
> We really shouldn't ship until this memory leak is fixed (which I just
> reported):
>
> http://bugs.racket-lang.org/query/?cmd=view&pr=14264
>
> It's making writing substantial
We really shouldn't ship until this memory leak is fixed (which I just
reported):
http://bugs.racket-lang.org/query/?cmd=view&pr=14264
It's making writing substantial programs very difficult, especially in
Typed Racket, which seems to be affected more.
It's possible there's a weird inter
On 12/29/13, 1:57 PM, Ryan Culpepper wrote:
* David Van Horn
- EoPL Tests
Done.
_
Racket Developers list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
My initial reaction to your message is that this is far too big of a test
case to hand over to someone else. Is there some way we can get you access
to a machine that demonstrates the problem so you can make something
smaller?
Robby
On Monday, December 30, 2013, Neil Toronto wrote:
> I don't thi
5 matches
Mail list logo
