[Vm-dev] gcc -Wall -pedantic (was: sweep failed to find exact
end of memory)
andreas.raab at gmx.de
Wed Apr 25 16:48:55 UTC 2007
Hi David -
Looking over your changes I see two consistent patterns: One is to
change all oops from sqInt to usqInt and the other one is to use the
"special" unsigned comparison for pointers. Is my interpretation
A related issue: It bothers me greatly how complex all of this stuff has
become. The whole 32/64bit conversion (oopForPointer: etc) and now
pointer comparisons (no longer using < or >) makes me wonder of how
sustainable this is. Even I can't recall all the rules that have to be
followed to write clean 32/64/2GB barrier code. I wish we had a way of
getting back to a set of simpler rules... any ideas anyone? The one idea
that I can think of immediately would be to support types in slang
better and have a specific slang compiler which can (for example) catch
signed/unsigned comparisons when you write them.
I'm open for any suggestions on how to improve this situation.
David T. Lewis wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 07:29:39PM -0700, Andreas Raab wrote:
>> Wow. Nice work. I can't speak for the others but since we have the
>> problem very practically at Qwaq I'd be willing to test drive these
>> changes for a while and see if they fix the problems. The best way to do
>> this would probably be to post change sets to this list (this allows me
>> to go over them method by method more easily).
> I posted the change sets under the subject line "VM patches for oop
> comparison and usqInt declarations".
>> Thanks for all the work!
> Thanks for reviewing and test driving them. I hope they solve the problem.
More information about the Vm-dev