GNU bug report logs -
#39997
High CPU load and no return value with 3.0.0
Previous Next
Full log
View this message in rfc822 format
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Your message dated Wed, 11 Mar 2020 15:11:48 +0100
with message-id <50786c56cd6b9632cdfb6e2c2f95e97c1758591d.camel <at> gnu.org>
and subject line Re: bug#39997: High CPU load and no return value with 3.0.0
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #39997,
regarding High CPU load and no return value with 3.0.0
to be marked as done.
(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs <at> gnu.org.)
--
39997: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=39997
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems
[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]
Dear Guile hackers,
When I use the "md5" module from guile-lib (release 0.2.6.1) together
with the following snippet in Guile 3.0.0, it never returns, while on
Guile 2.2.6, it returns the MD5 sum of the input string:
---
(use-modules (md5))
(define (md5-from-string input)
(call-with-input-string input md5))
(define (random-ascii length)
"Returns a random string of ASCII characters of length LENGTH."
(list->string
(map (lambda _ (integer->char (+ (random 95) 32)))
(iota length))))
(display
(md5-from-string
(random-ascii 32)))
---
Could you point me in the right direction for finding the problem?
This could be completely off-topic:
I also noticed that the function "read-string!/partial" (used by the
md5 module) no longer appears in the manual since the Guile 2.2. Is
the usage of this function considered deprecated?
Kind regards,
Roel Janssen
[Message part 3 (message/rfc822, inline)]
On Wed, 2020-03-11 at 15:05 +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Roel Janssen <roel <at> gnu.org> skribis:
>
> > On Wed, 2020-03-11 at 12:07 +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > The Guix package has this patch:
> > >
> > > '(begin
> > > ;; Work around miscompilation on Guile 3.0.0 at -O2:
> > > ;; <https://bugs.gnu.org/39251>;;.
> > > (substitute* "src/md5.scm"
> > > (("\\(define f-ash ash\\)")
> > > "(define f-ash (@ (guile) ash))\n")
> > > (("\\(define f-add \\+\\)")
> > > "(define f-add (@ (guile) +))\n"))
> > > #t)
> > >
> > > It’s very likely that you’re hitting this problem.
> >
> > Yes! Thanks for sharing this fix.
> > I applied the same changes to my code and now I don't encounter the
> > bug
> > anymore.
> >
> > I tested the patched code with both guile-2.2 and guile-3.0. Do
> > you
> > know whether this will also work with guile-2.0? (I'd like to keep
> > things compatible with guile-2.0 for a few more years).
>
> Yes, the change above also works for Guile 2.0.
Thanks for the confirmation. I'm closing this bug, as it is basically
a duplicate of #39251.
Kind regards,
Roel Janssen
This bug report was last modified 5 years and 95 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.