Peter Dalgaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Peter Dalgaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Prof Brian Ripley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > I've seen many similar things in a report from valgrind. But they > > > went away when compiled without optimization: it seems optimization > > > often does a fetch one element off the end of an array when attempting > > > to keep the pipelines full. > > > > > I'd start by re-running the valgrind tests without optimization. > > > > I was going to anyway, but the reported problem did carry all the > > hallmarks of the use of a memory location with random content. > > Still present with "-g" recompile, and a breakpoint in lowesb showed > that the last call had garbage in the "iv" array.
The latter turned out to be a red herring. Apparently a gdb bug messed up the "x/50d" command that I was using to inspect the array. The real problem was in other arguments, namely "diagl" and "trl" which are declared double precision, but passed "&zero" where "zero" is declared to be of type "Sint". Now, the 64000$ question is whether it is safe to try and fix it for 2.1.1... -- O__ ---- Peter Dalgaard Øster Farimagsgade 5, Entr.B c/ /'_ --- Dept. of Biostatistics PO Box 2099, 1014 Cph. K (*) \(*) -- University of Copenhagen Denmark Ph: (+45) 35327918 ~~~~~~~~~~ - ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) FAX: (+45) 35327907 ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
