Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] fix incorrect type of jmp_buf

[Jörg F . Wittenberger]

On Jun 21 2013, Peter Bex wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 02:32:01PM +0200, Jörg F. Wittenberger wrote:
> > On Jun 18 2013, Peter Bex wrote:
> > >On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 02:50:21PM +0200, Jörg F. Wittenberger wrote:
> > >> Also running my code under valgrind doesn't *really* work. It did 
> > >> catch some uninitalized variables etc (one "count" is still not fixed 
> > >> in C_reclaim:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>   if(gc_mode == GC_REALLOC) {
> > >>     C_rereclaim2(percentage(heap_size, C_heap_growth), 0);
> > >>     gc_mode = GC_MAJOR;
> > >>     count = (C_uword)tospace_top - (C_uword)tospace_start;
> > >>     goto i_like_spaghetti;
> > >>   }
> > >>
> > >>The "count" above.
> > >
> > >What, specifically, is wrong with it?
> >
> > Rigth before "goto i_like_italian_food" there is no assignment to 
> > "count" in the chicken source. Valgrind therefore complains about the 
> > possible use of an uninitialized variable.
>
> I don't see this assignment in a clean copy of the master branch, and
> count doesn't appear to be used when gc_mode is GC_REALLOC.

Sure, you can't. It's missing.

Sorry, I'm not native English: I don't know how to express better that
"anything ought to be assigned to <count> before used (further down)".

> If you still think this is wrong,

It's not me, it's valgrind who complains. I don't care. ;-)

> could you prepare a patch and elaborate
> a little on what exactly is going wrong?

No, I'm not even sure the value l assigned is correct.
I just guessed from context… it's going to be printed only anyway.

There are more important things to do about chicken than killing
age old none-bugs.


Who's running valgrind on chicken besides me?

> Cheers,
> Peter