[self-interest] VM crashing, expected behavior?

[ungar at mac.com]

Looking at your original example, it seems clear to me that the process with the activation that creates the block finishes
while the block is running. That's why (I suspect) you get the crash.
We check for *entering* a nonlifo block, but your example likely enters the block while its home is alive, then the delay
gives the home time to go away.

- David


On Aug 15, 2012, at 2:50 AM, Tobias Pape <Das.Linux at gmx.de> wrote:

> 
> Am 14.08.2012 um 23:15 schrieb ungar at mac.com:
> 
>> Self does not support non-lifo blocks. This should be an error, not a crash.
>> 
>> 
>> On Aug 14, 2012, at 7:16 AM, Tobias Pape <Das.Linux at gmx.de> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> Do you think that this code
>>> 
>>> (message copy receiver: [
>>> times delay: 300.
>>> benchmarks measurePerformance.
>>> ] Selector: 'value') fork resume.
>>> 
>>> should crash the VM?
> 
> So, this is a non-lifo as it refers to 'times' and 'benchmarks'?
> would 
> 
> [ | :myGlobals | 
> myGlobals delay: 300.
> myGlobals measurePerformance.
> ] value: globals
> 
> be non-lifo?
> 

No, this should be OK.


> Best
> 	-Tobias
> 
> PS: what about re-introducing full block closures?
>