Eliot replied to the same question on the Squeak mailing list: <copy> My first attempt at the closure compiler did not fix the decompiler, did not implement copying methods with temp names correctly and had a minor compiler bug with optimized blocks.
The issue with the decompiler and with copying methods with temp names is that with BlueBook blocks temporaries are simply an array but with closures they are a tree, since temporaries in blocks live in those blocks, not on the stack of the home context. Since the decompiler and discarding sources can be lived without I left them for later. I now have a functional decompiler, have implemented copy with temp names and have an unintegrated fix for the compiler bug (the failing test is testInlineBlockCollectionLR3). Once Andreas' new Monticello loader is more generally available I can make these fixes available. The problem is that the fixes are integrated into packages in Qwaq's repository and being compiler changes they don't "just load". </copy> So we need to wait until these fixes are made public. I created an issue http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=978 Adrian On Jul 5, 2009, at 19:54 , Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > I think Eliot is not in this mailing list, so, I cc him. > > Cheers, > > Mariano > > On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 9:11 AM, Lukas Renggli <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> ClosureTests>>#testToDoOutsideTemp and >> ClosureTests>>#testWhileModificationBefore demonstrate two minor >> problems with the closure implementation. Many Smalltalk >> implementations (including the expensive industrial strength ones) >> get >> these two and some of the other tests in ClosureTests wrong. >> >> If these two tests cannot be easily fixed I don't think they are a >> show stopper and should be marked as expected failures. I don't know >> about the other closure tests. >> >> Cheers, >> Lukas >> >> >> 2009/7/5 Adrian Lienhard <[email protected]>: >>> Hi Eliot and Lukas >>> >>> There are 9 failing tests in the two classes ClosureCompilerTests >>> and >>> ClosureTests that you wrote. >>> >>> Do they document bugs in the implementation, and if yes, what >>> needs to >>> be done? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Adrian >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Lukas Renggli >> http://www.lukas-renggli.ch >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
