Re: [Rd] [FORGED] src/modules/X11/devX11.c, can we remove "#if BUG" yet

2019-05-02 Thread frederik
Thanks again ... but by the way, I wonder if this would be a good time to take another look at the use case that produced this error. Consider that you have a complicated algorithm you are trying to analyze, and you decide to display plots of certain data, as part of the algorithm's main loop. Th

Re: [Rd] [FORGED] src/modules/X11/devX11.c, can we remove "#if BUG" yet

2019-05-02 Thread frederik
I tested it. It fixes the bug and didn't seem to produce any errors. Thank you Professor Dalgaard! I'm so glad this has finally been addressed. I will update the bug report. (https://bugs.r-project.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16702) On Thu, May 02, 2019 at 04:48:51PM +0200, peter dalgaard wro

Re: [Rd] [FORGED] src/modules/X11/devX11.c, can we remove "#if BUG" yet

2019-05-02 Thread peter dalgaard
OK, this is now in R-devel, but only superficially tested (b/c this is a Mac). Please check it out. -pd > On 30 Apr 2019, at 23:09 , Paul Murrell wrote: > > Hi Peter > > Yes, that looks roughly right to me. I would be in favour of your option > (b), partly because it is probably easiest and

Re: [Rd] [FORGED] src/modules/X11/devX11.c, can we remove "#if BUG" yet

2019-04-30 Thread Paul Murrell
Hi Peter Yes, that looks roughly right to me. I would be in favour of your option (b), partly because it is probably easiest and partly because that retains the basic graphics device startup logic pattern that is replicated across all(?) graphics devices. Paul On 28/04/19 11:39 AM, peter d

Re: [Rd] [FORGED] src/modules/X11/devX11.c, can we remove "#if BUG" yet

2019-04-27 Thread peter dalgaard
I had a look at the current code, and AFAICT it has essentially the same structure as it did back then. I think it may have finally dawned upon me what the issue really is: The logic is that in Rf_addX11Device, we have if (!X11DeviceDriver(dev, display, width, height,

Re: [Rd] [FORGED] src/modules/X11/devX11.c, can we remove "#if BUG" yet

2019-04-25 Thread frederik
Thanks Professor Dalgard. If you have a different way to fix the bug then I'd be happy to test it. Or whatever. I understand that maybe some data was being referenced before it had been initialized. I could also support moving the R_ProcessEvents call in another place, but it seems one would als

Re: [Rd] [FORGED] src/modules/X11/devX11.c, can we remove "#if BUG" yet

2019-04-24 Thread peter dalgaard
OK, so I did the archaeology anyway This was the story, R-core November 29, 2001. Part of thread "X11 still segfaults". >> . Gah. I've been too tired today. Why did that take me so long? The culprit seems to be R_ProcessEvents((void*) NULL) in newX11DeviceDriver This g

Re: [Rd] [FORGED] src/modules/X11/devX11.c, can we remove "#if BUG" yet

2019-04-24 Thread peter dalgaard
I don't recall exactly what I did 18 years ago eiher and I likely don't have the time to dig into the archives and reconstruct. I can imagine that the issue had to do with the protocol around creating and mapping windows. Presumably the segfault comes from looking for events on a window that ha

Re: [Rd] [FORGED] src/modules/X11/devX11.c, can we remove "#if BUG" yet

2019-04-23 Thread frederik
Thanks Paul for answering the additional question. I admit that I've only had experience with R's X11 code through work on a couple of bugs, but for some reason I thought it might be nontrivial to move it all into a self-contained module due to interactions with various event loops. The two modul

Re: [Rd] [FORGED] src/modules/X11/devX11.c, can we remove "#if BUG" yet

2019-04-23 Thread Paul Murrell
Hi Sorry, I can't offer an explanation for the commented-out line. However, regarding your final question of avoiding the R-core bottleneck, you do have the option of creating a third-party graphics device package. See, for example, the 'tikzDevice' and 'svglite' packages on CRAN. Does that