Hi,
it works perfectly now, with both 1000x1000 and 2000x2000 matrices.
Thanks,
Viktor
On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 2:40 AM, Liam Healy lhealy@common-lisp.net wrote:
Viktor,
I've pushed to master a new version that I hope solves your problem, as well as the other mysterious SBCL problems reported here. When I run your (test 1000) there is no error and it looks reasonable. Please pull it, try again, and post your results.
Liam
On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 11:15 AM, Viktor Leis viktor.leis@googlemail.com wrote:
Great! Thanks for the effort.
Viktor
On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 3:55 PM, Liam Healy lhealy@common-lisp.net wrote:
After a conversation with Paul Khuong on #lisp, I think we have figured out what is causing this problem. I need to change the way the array pointers are used in SBCL. I don't think it's too complicated a fix, but I am in the midst of something else so I can't get to it right away.
Liam
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 5:26 AM, Viktor Leis viktor.leis@googlemail.com wrote:
I'm using SBCL 1.0.25 on AMD64 and SBCL 1.0.17 on a 32-bit box. By nonsense results I mean wrong results: the second return value contains only zeros. When SBCL crashes I either get a SB-SYS:MEMORY-FAULT-ERROR or "fatal error encountered in SBC