0.7.4.1:

[sbcl.git] / src / compiler / dfo.lisp

diff --git a/src/compiler/dfo.lisp b/src/compiler/dfo.lisp
index 8cd45d4..a22339d 100644 (file)
--- a/src/compiler/dfo.lisp
+++ b/src/compiler/dfo.lisp
@@ -69,9 +69,10 @@
     (setf (component-lambdas new)
          (nconc (component-lambdas old) (component-lambdas new)))
     (setf (component-lambdas old) nil)
-    (setf (component-new-funs new) (nconc (component-new-funs old)
-                                         (component-new-funs new))
-         (component-new-funs old) nil)
+    (setf (component-new-functionals new)
+         (nconc (component-new-functionals old)
+                (component-new-functionals new)))
+    (setf (component-new-functionals old) nil)
 
     (dolist (xp (block-pred old-tail))
       (unlink-blocks xp old-tail)
@@ -100,7 +101,7 @@
 ;;; before it walks the successors. It looks at the home CLAMBDA's
 ;;; BIND block to see whether that block is in some other component:
 ;;; -- If the block is in the initial component, then do
-;;;    DFO-WALK-DEPENDENCY-GRAPH on the home function to move it
+;;;    DFO-SCAVENGE-DEPENDENCY-GRAPH on the home function to move it
 ;;;    into COMPONENT.
 ;;; -- If the block is in some other component, join COMPONENT into
 ;;;    it and return that component.
@@ -198,13 +199,6 @@
 ;;; oversight, not by design, as per the bug reported by WHN on
 ;;; cmucl-imp ca. 2001-11-29 and explained by DTC shortly after.)
 ;;;
-;;; FIXME: Very likely we should be scavenging NLX-based dependencies
-;;; here too. OTOH, there's a lot of global weirdness in NLX handling,
-;;; so it might be taken care of some other way that I haven't figured
-;;; out yet. Perhaps the best way to address this would be to try to
-;;; construct a NLX-based test case which fails in the same way as the
-;;; closure-based test case on cmucl-imp 2001-11-29.)
-;;;
 ;;; If the function is in an initial component, then we move its head
 ;;; and tail to COMPONENT and add it to COMPONENT's lambdas. It is
 ;;; harmless to move the tail (even though the return might be
@@ -384,8 +378,7 @@
     ;; initial component tail (due NIL function terminated blocks)
     ;; are moved to the appropriate new component tail.
     (dolist (toplevel-lambda toplevel-lambdas)
-      (let* ((block (lambda-block toplevel-lambda))
-            (old-component (block-component block))
+      (let* ((old-component (lambda-component toplevel-lambda))
             (old-component-lambdas (component-lambdas old-component))
             (new-component nil))
        (aver (member toplevel-lambda old-component-lambdas))