Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-esme-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: (qmail 13300 invoked from network); 27 Jan 2010 11:03:06 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 27 Jan 2010 11:03:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 49313 invoked by uid 500); 27 Jan 2010 11:03:06 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-esme-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 49265 invoked by uid 500); 27 Jan 2010 11:03:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact esme-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: esme-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list esme-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 49255 invoked by uid 99); 27 Jan 2010 11:03:06 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 11:03:06 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of hirsch.dick@gmail.com designates 209.85.218.210 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.218.210] (HELO mail-bw0-f210.google.com) (209.85.218.210) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 11:02:58 +0000 Received: by bwz2 with SMTP id 2so4467117bwz.20 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 03:02:38 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=kDBZqXjaYk8X5A5JHB4VcU7Ror/bpbpbk+3bqOPawRA=; b=Y01oBJ+7zJfD3SUzFRjhxha4TPxAhDz409wniCUqb2wpqfpDZzPiRcLYjdOGAtk09f 5Bt4XZ5mCFhTbwY11zyMROoBowwrgsEDF5HBfGP9vNv68XWZp56F2ofdeLEFEffMxVmj 9VWa0FibEZF6hrpOBOCBqfh6atYzOQ6RWfVVo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=MVH1NcxC4dEv6YhnACA26xAivK0ns5S2WIACtvfqeOIDWUTcr6MxYKGroiwkafrzfZ VCEpG0syirn+lgZejC75ncNcSqpZgr8UJ3EwAnRFgujRKgYklFvzCts8cR61qlP+/a8Y ePOIc+LP0NFBBrAkPCUQZz1whJMFMcFzYHqhY= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.16.194 with SMTP id p2mr233325bka.32.1264590157897; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 03:02:37 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <9cbd74ac1001241040h32eed541wad74ce2cf51c84ee@mail.gmail.com> <9cbd74ac1001270049r5ab8735cg721aa4a5b0117849@mail.gmail.com> <9cbd74ac1001270054t6e14132fg5049d23a92ee3425@mail.gmail.com> <9cbd74ac1001270124o3d51406fsb90af5cba95f59d3@mail.gmail.com> <9cbd74ac1001270134o45bcf9e7h811c6b7c81bee31c@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:02:37 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Wee error From: Richard Hirsch To: esme-dev@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00032555abea25e366047e23570c X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --00032555abea25e366047e23570c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Vassil Dichev wrote: > I thought initially that this is some sort of infinite loop, but it seems > not. > > The specs I suspected are "AddAction" and "AddActionNeg". Each one of > these contains a monstrous for comprehension. If I delete a couple of > lines from these, it works even without tuning the stack size. > > I think this is unnecessarily pushing the limits of the compiler. In > the first part of the for comprehensions every line depends on the > previous, so the compiler has to check every new line in the context > of new variables bound by the previous lines. > > I don't think every new test line depends on the others, right? > Probably this is the case for login and pools, but otherwise the > compile will be unnecessarily slow, even when it manages to build. > > Can we refactor the test based on actual dependencies in the execution > of API calls? Of course. Probably easier to have multiple small tests rather than one large test. You can probably comment the two tests and I'll break it down into smaller tests later. > > Vassil > --00032555abea25e366047e23570c--