Re: Possible bug in MemoizedSymbol

On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 06:19:33PM -0600, [email protected] wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 05:22:51PM -0600, [email protected] wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 11:05:48PM +0100, Andreas Prohaska wrote:
> > > 
> > > I think, I have found a memory leak in the MemoizedSymbol implementation.
> > > However, I'm not too familiar with SISC so I may be wrong. This is what
> > > I have done:
> > > 
> > > I run a small scheme code like '(let ((a 1)) (+ a a))' in a single Context
> > > for about 1000 times. It seems to me like the 'let' creates a kind of
> > > naming context for all variables (e.g. 'a') created inside and stores
> > > these variables as MemoizedSymbols (e.g. 'a_FooBarWhatEver'). These
> > > MemoizedSymbols are stored in a static WeakHashMap with their names
> > > (e.g. 'a_FooBarWhatEver') as key.
> > 
> > Were you repeatedly calling eval() or something?  If you run this code 
> > in a Scheme loop, you won't be compiling the code over and over and thus 
> > not generating new symbols.  Nevertheless...
> 
> Actually, even weirder: that particular expression should reduce to (+ 
> '1 '1) after the optimizer finishes with it.  Was that actually the 
> expression?

Though they still will be created *during* optimization, so nevermind.
	
	Scott

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+cSXrr9IW4v3mHtQRAtTwAJ9RftOntTSofeN0n9skPtXtCeK7ngCgh7A2
nHf9IEBv/Wy/RbskHRp5Otc=
=ZjTy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----