Re: [Chicken-hackers] C_substring_copy: use C_memmove instead of C_memcpy

[Peter Bex]

On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 03:02:06PM +0000, Mario Domenech Goulart wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Please, review the attached patch.  It should fix #1135, which is
> related to string-copy! and affects at least the gap-buffer egg.

Thank you, Mario!  This patch is good, and I've pushed it as-is,
and cherry-picked it to the stability branch.

We discussed this on IRC for a bit, I've noticed that there are
some other incorrect uses of memcpy in the core code.  We attempted
to make a patch but that didn't work out so well.

I've looked into this a little more, but I guess I inadvertently opened
a can of worms: I added optimization to the lolevel-tests.scm
compilation, so the possibly bogus rewrite for move-memory! gets
exercised.  Then I saw that there's another rewrite elsewhere
that uses the w2b macro that doesn't exist, so I replaced it with
the C_bytes macro which does exist (and the use in lolevel.scm as
well, where it _is_ available).

But then I ran into another weird crash in the object-become! test,
so I decided I should look into this another time, and created the
ticket #1136 for it.

Cheers,
Peter
-- 
http://www.more-magic.net