From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Dec 24 10:06:13 2018 Received: (at 33848) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Dec 2018 15:06:13 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35540 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gbRo5-00063E-01 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 24 Dec 2018 10:06:13 -0500 Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([185.233.100.1]:58974) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gbRo3-000636-Iy for 33848@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 24 Dec 2018 10:06:11 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hera.aquilenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0079C1494; Mon, 24 Dec 2018 16:06:11 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at aquilenet.fr Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (hera.aquilenet.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 57lQzFcVz4IN; Mon, 24 Dec 2018 16:06:10 +0100 (CET) Received: from ribbon (unknown [IPv6:2a01:e0a:1d:7270:af76:b9b:ca24:c465]) by hera.aquilenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C72FA138F; Mon, 24 Dec 2018 16:06:09 +0100 (CET) From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= To: Pierre Neidhardt Subject: Re: bug#33848: Store references in SBCL-compiled code are "invisible" References: <87r2e8jpfx.fsf@gnu.org> <877eg0i43j.fsf@netris.org> <87d0psi1xo.fsf@gnu.org> <874lb3kin6.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 16:06:09 +0100 In-Reply-To: <874lb3kin6.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> (Pierre Neidhardt's message of "Sun, 23 Dec 2018 23:01:01 +0100") Message-ID: <87sgynezha.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 33848 Cc: Mark H Weaver , 33848@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) Hi Pierre, Pierre Neidhardt skribis: >> I don=E2=80=99t think we=E2=80=99ve encountered the problem before. > > Actually it does ring a bell for me. Didn't we have a similar issue with= Fish, > or some dependency? We did have a problem with Fish but I can no longer find it. Do you remember what it was? Something with C++, no? >> For now I lean towards looking for a way to address the issue >> specifically for SBCL. > > Don't forget that we currently have 5 Lisp compilers. > Besides, it's not clear that this can be fixed on the compiler's side, it= could > very well be that patches will be required on a per-project basis. I know little about CL but maybe we can find a solution that works for all five compilers. At least that would be the first approach I would suggest following. Thanks, Ludo=E2=80=99.