From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1087EBC6C for ; Tue, 27 Nov 2007 19:21:48 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAAGfuS0fUnw6Flmdsb2JhbACCOY0FAQEBAQcEBhERBw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.23,220,1194217200"; d="scan'208";a="6246215" Received: from pih-relay06.plus.net ([212.159.14.133]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 27 Nov 2007 19:21:47 +0100 Received: from [80.229.56.224] (helo=beast.local) by pih-relay06.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1Ix546-0007vs-J7; Tue, 27 Nov 2007 18:21:46 +0000 From: Jon Harrop Organization: Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. To: Richard Jones Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Floating exception Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 18:13:06 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 References: <47471716.3020304@irisa.fr> <200711271119.26078.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <20071127153553.GA20004@furbychan.cocan.org> In-Reply-To: <20071127153553.GA20004@furbychan.cocan.org> Cc: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200711271813.06441.jon@ffconsultancy.com> X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 bindings:01 lablgl:01 bindings:01 ocaml:01 lablgtk:01 predictable:01 pulled:98 frog:98 wrote:01 wrote:01 exception:01 caml-list:01 glut:01 glut:01 On Tuesday 27 November 2007 15:35, Richard Jones wrote: > On Tue, Nov 27, 2007 at 11:19:25AM +0000, Jon Harrop wrote: > > There isn't really anything more that I can add. We wrote the OCaml the > > obvious way (no unsafe code) and used the conventional bindings (LablGL) > > and distributed the binary, only to find that too many people had > > reliability problems for it to be a viable product so we pulled it. > > It does sound like the bindings or GL implementations are to blame. GL works on these computers from programs not written in OCaml. > virt-top is used by an indeterminate number of people, as a binary, > and I've not had any reports like this. It does plenty of floating > point, it's native code, and compiled in the usual way. Do you have statistics for any OpenGL-based OCaml programs? > > My guess is that the glut libraries installed on these computers are > > causing the problems. Perhaps we should write bindings to GLX or use > > LablGTK2 to evade glut and see what happens but, of course, we cannot > > reproduce the problem here and there are a huge number of variations we > > could try without having any real idea of what is going wrong. > > Do you remember if the crashes happened at predictable places (for > your customers) or were they random each time the program ran? Random. -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/?e