On Tue, 28 Sep 2004, Kevin Rosenberg wrote:
> I've reproduced your results. I'm not convinced that SBCL is operating
> correctly when DEBUG is set to 3:
I believe this is STEP's fault. Unless someone gets there first, I'll
investigate this later this week / early next week. "Should be simple."
>> ; compiling DEFUN READ-HTTP-REQUEST:
>> debugger invoked on a SB-INT:BUG in thread 18142:
>> full call to SB-KERNEL:DATA-VECTOR-SET
...but this actually looks related to bug #302. I wonder if this is a case
of two separate bugs, the new #302-lookalike being triggered by the
> call to SB-KERNEL:DATA-VECTOR-SET when (OPTIMIZE (DEBUG 3)). Also,
> hopefully someone on that list knows about the general
> suitability/caveats of using DEBUG 3.
DEBUG 3 when SIZE & SPEED are less then DEBUG introduces a significant
performance penalty and code bloat these days (say a factor of x5 compared
to what it used to be?), due to the new instrumentation based single
stepper. Bugs there are just that --bugs-- and hopefully will be weeded
out soonish -- but the performance penalty is likely to stay. Then again,
as long as the performance is not a problem, I see no reason to avoid
-- Nikodemus Schemer: "Buddha is small, clean, and serious."
Lispnik: "Buddha is big, has hairy armpits, and laughs."