Re: [pure-lang-users] llvm 2.3 - good news

[Albert G. <Dr....@t-...>]

Jiri Spitz wrote:
> The code compiles much faster now. However, your latest changes made the 
> execution memory eager and my favourite test 'set (1..1000000)' caused 
> my PC swap to death. It seems the code isn't tail recursive anymore.

Sorry, I can't test right now, because I just upgraded my system and I'm
still in the process of getting up and running again. But it sounds like
I introduced a memory leak with the latest change. (If TCO wouldn't work
any more, you'd get stack overflows instead.) I will have a look asap.

Albert

-- 
Dr. Albert Gr"af
Dept. of Music-Informatics, University of Mainz, Germany
Email:  Dr....@t-..., ag...@mu...
WWW:    http://www.musikinformatik.uni-mainz.de/ag