http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=11139



--- Comment #10 from Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw@ubuntu.com> 2013-11-04 00:55:16 PST ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Ignore the above comment, if I add GC.addRange(tmp, size) after line 24 it
> stops segfaulting.

(In reply to comment #8)
> Debugging this it looks like it is calling/jumping into a heap location ([rcx+40] instead of static call,) instead of calling Frop.zoo.

It's called virtual. :~)

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=11139



--- Comment #11 from Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw@ubuntu.com> 2013-11-04 01:09:06 PST ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Ignore the above comment, if I add GC.addRange(tmp, size) after line 24 it
> stops segfaulting.

No need to debug this, it's quite obvious what's going on (see my first comment).  Don't think there's any real *fix* here other than using GC.malloc to allocate the memory instead of cstdlib.malloc.

The GC does not track memory allocated outside of the GC, and it is unwise to think that GC'd memory is safe from collection if it's only being referenced by raw malloc'd memory.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=11139


Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw@ubuntu.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |INVALID


-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------