[tbnl-devel] Re: problem with the example

[Sergio Garcia]

Ok, thanks!

I just switched to SBCL from CMUCL because of the lack of unicode
support  in CMUCL :( *sigh*




On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 20:52:34 +0100, Edi Weitz <edi at agharta.de> wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 19:50:22 +0100, Sergio Garcia <sergio.garcia at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > I upgraded to a 2.6 kernel, and the error message stopped. However,
> > the problem changed. Now, the browser just freezed, and in the sbcl
> > REPL I got:
> >
> >  WARNING:
> >    recursive lock attempt #S(SB-THREAD:MUTEX
> >                              :NAME "session-data-lock"
> >                              :LOCK 0
> >                              :DATA NIL
> >                              :VALUE 5041)
> >
> > I had a look at the code of session, and it seems to me that
> > setting-f a session-value when a session has not been created,
> > creates a nested "with-lock-held" on a same object by calling
> > start-session. I just put a start-session at the beggining of the
> > session test, and it seems to work fine now. Is this right?
> 
> The analysis is right, but the cure isn't.  (Well, in this particular
> case it probably is.)  The problem is that parts of TBNL assume that
> locks /can/ be nested which is the case for CMUCL, LW, and AllegroCL.
> You might want to ask on the SBCL mailing list how to get locks that
> can be nested or alternatively ask Kevin Rosenberg to patch KMRCL.
> 
> The easiest way is to switch to CMUCL, though... :)
> 
> Cheers,
> Edi.
>