On 2011-06-06, at 8:17 AM, Mikael More wrote:
Maybe it could be some kind of sallad in the use of gambit.h, such that the new install tries to re-use the gambit.h of my 4.5.1 install? Funny though that this error does not happen when lib/os.h is unmodified.
The error is simpler than that... In lib/os_base.c there is some extra code in the initialization of ___base_mod that shouldn't be there:
___base_module ___base_mod = { 0
#ifdef ___DEBUG , 0, 0, 0 #ifdef ___DEBUG_ALLOC_MEM_TRACE , 0, 0 #endif #endif
#ifdef ___BASE_MODULE_INIT ___BASE_MODULE_INIT #endif };
Just remove the
#ifdef ___DEBUG_ALLOC_MEM_TRACE , 0, 0 #endif
I guess the C++ compiler is a bit more finicky than the C compiler (which does not mind having more fields than the definition of the ___base_module structure in lib/os_base.h).
Marc
Afficher les réponses par date
Hi Marc,
I was wondering if there is a write-up of the details of how Gambit implements first-class continuations?
I'm writing a little language for research purposes, but I'm not sure how to do continuations efficiently, and the Inside-out slides whetted my appetite, but I couldn't grok it fully from them.
If others on the list have pointers to papers as well, I'd enjoy reading about the best thoughts on how to implement continuations.
Thanks!
Jason
Hallo,
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 11:14 PM, Jason E. Aten j.e.aten@gmail.com wrote:
If others on the list have pointers to papers as well, I'd enjoy reading about the best thoughts on how to implement continuations.
"Representing Control in the Presence of First-Class Continuations" http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~dyb/papers/stack.ps
"A portable implementation of first-class continuations for unrestricted interoperability with C in a multithreaded Scheme" http://repository.readscheme.org/ftp/papers/sw2000/feeley.pdf
"Implementation strategies for first-class continuations" http://www.springerlink.com/content/h5808n962434j275/fulltext.pdf
More in: http://library.readscheme.org/page6.html
Cheers,