Fix loop RC issues #918
Merged
Fix loop RC issues #918
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
MaxGraey
reviewed
Oct 19, 2019
|
Alright, this now implements the code size compromise in that all iterations use the same unified wrapped and non-null states, even if either the first or all subsequent iterations might actually know that vars are wrapped or non-null. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
fixes #897
As reported in the linked issue, there have still been issues with reference counting in loops. In particular
forloops didn't release inner locals immediately after the body but relied on general cleanup in continue code, leading to duplicate releases on nested continuesdoloops performed releases at the wrong timeforloops compiled the incrementor too early