On 7 November 2016 at 15:13, Waldek Hebisch <hebi...@math.uni.wroc.pl> wrote:
> Bill Page wrote:
>>
>> The following simple patch
>>
>> https://github.com/billpage/fricas/commit/dad89022088a2a9c410344d10b1cda06773a61f9.patch
>>
> ...
> That works. However:
>
> (4) -> f2(void())$Union(f1 : Void, f2 : Void)
>
> The function f2 is not implemented in Union(f1: Void,f2: Void) .
>
> (4) -> f2(void())
> There are no library operations named f2
> Use HyperDoc Browse or issue
> )what op f2
> to learn if there is any operation containing " f2 " in its name.
>
> Cannot find a definition or applicable library operation named f2
> with argument type(s)
> Void
>
> Perhaps you should use "@" to indicate the required return type,
> or "$" to specify which version of the function you need.
>
Yes I noticed that. It seems that one cannot package-call functions
from built-in domains from the interpreter. Package calling does work
in the compiler though. For example:
--
)abbrev domain TESTU TestU
TestU(): with
F1:()->Integer
== add
U1:=f2(3) $ Union(f1:Integer,f2:Integer)
F1() ==
if U1 case f1 then
U1.f1
else
U1.f2
--
This also happens already with some other existing functions. For example:
(1) -> X:=Record(f1:Integer)
(1) Record(f1: Integer)
Type: Type
(2) -> x:X := [-1]
(2) [f1 = - 1]
Type: Record(f1: Integer)
(3) -> copy(x)$X
The function copy is not implemented in Record(f1: Integer) .
However 'construct' does work even when (apparently) package called.
I noticed there is quite a lot of hacking involved in handling
'construct' so I didn't try to analyze that. But I tried to to find
out why this fails for 'copy' (and the functions I added) but I got
lost somewhere between bottomUp and the database code.
(3) -> )set break break
(3) -> copy(x)$X
The function copy is not implemented in Record(f1: Integer) .
debugger invoked on a SIMPLE-CONDITION in thread
#<THREAD "main thread" RUNNING {1003BC6C53}>:
break
Type HELP for debugger help, or (SB-EXT:EXIT) to exit from SBCL.
restarts (invokable by number or by possibly-abbreviated name):
0: [CONTINUE] Return from BREAK.
(|handleLispBreakLoop| |break|)
0] backtrace
Backtrace for: #<SB-THREAD:THREAD "main thread" RUNNING {1003BC6C53}>
0: (|handleLispBreakLoop| |break|)
1: (|bottomUp| (#(|Dollar| NIL NIL NIL NIL) X (#(|copy| NIL NIL NIL
NIL) #(|x| #1=(|Record| (|:| |f1| #)) (#1# WRAPPED -1) (#1#) NIL))))
2: (|interpret1| ((|$elt| X |copy|) |x|) NIL (|Application| (|Fromdom|
((|id| (|posn| #1=# . 0)) . |copy|) ((|id| (|posn| #1# . 8)) . X))
((|id| (|posn| #1# . 5)) . |x|)))
3: (|interpret| ((|$elt| X |copy|) |x|) (|Application| (|Fromdom|
((|id| (|posn| #1=# . 0)) . |copy|) ((|id| (|posn| #1# . 8)) . X))
((|id| (|posn| #1# . 5)) . |x|)))
...
Can you suggest how to continue debug this?
Oddly in this case I can write:
(3) -> copy(x)
(3) [f1 = - 1]
and even this (with the corresponding patch for Record)
(4) -> f1(x)
(4) - 1
Type: Integer
But as you observed in the case of Union
(5) -> Y:=Union(f1:Integer)
(5) Union(f1: Integer)
Type: Type
(6) -> f1(-1)
There are no library operations named f1
Use HyperDoc Browse or issue
)what op f1
to learn if there is any operation containing " f1 " in its name.
Cannot find a definition or applicable library operation named f1
with argument type(s)
Integer
Perhaps you should use "@" to indicate the required return type,
or "$" to specify which version of the function you need.
Yet the following is OK:
(7) -> f1(-1)@Y
(7) - 1
Type: Union(f1: Integer,...)
I am a little perplexed.
> so more is needed to have consistent support for such feature.
>
Define consistent. What should we expect to work and what not?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"FriCAS - computer algebra system" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to fricas-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to fricas-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/fricas-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
