Re: luaL_argerror in 5.1.1
[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Date Index]
[
Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: luaL_argerror in 5.1.1
- From: roberto@... (Roberto Ierusalimschy)
- Date: 2006年7月13日 15:48:13 -0300
> > Here is another (much simpler) test case, in pure Lua
> > (that shows BTW that luaL_argerror is not the one to blame).
>
> The problem is with the symbolic executor (symbexec, in ldebug.c). When
> creating a closure, Lua (re)uses the opcode OP_GETUPVAL as a way to
> tell that the new function has, as upvalue, an upvalue from the enclosing
> function (Var, in your example); [...]
> But 'symbexec' handles the OP_GETUPVAL as a real instruction,
> and therefore reports that the value at register 0 (the one being called),
> came from that upvalue.
I hope the next patch solves the bug:
ldebug.c: function symbexec:
case OP_CLOSURE: {
- int nup;
+ int nup, j;
check(b < pt->sizep);
nup = pt->p[b]->nups;
check(pc + nup < pt->sizecode);
- for (; nup>0; nup--) {
- OpCode op1 = GET_OPCODE(pt->code[pc+nup]);
+ for (j = 1; j <= nup; j++) {
+ OpCode op1 = GET_OPCODE(pt->code[pc + j]);
check(op1 == OP_GETUPVAL || op1 == OP_MOVE);
}
+ if (reg != NO_REG) /* tracing? */
+ pc += nup; /* do not 'execute' these pseudo-instructions */
break;
}
-- Roberto