I'd agree that your code is not behaving as expected. Don't have
something off the top of my head though :/
M
On 12/13/2016 02:51 PM, Dave NotTelling wrote:
> Assuming that is reproducible, does anyone have suggestions on how to
> get around it?
>
> On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 9:16 PM, Dave NotTellin
Assuming that is reproducible, does anyone have suggestions on how to get
around it?
On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 9:16 PM, Dave NotTelling wrote:
> Here is a full example:
>
> [code]
>
> #!/usr/bin/python
>
> import pmt
>
> d = pmt.make_dict()
> d = pmt.dict_add(d, pmt.intern('a'), pmt.intern('a'))
>
Here is a full example:
[code]
#!/usr/bin/python
import pmt
d = pmt.make_dict()
d = pmt.dict_add(d, pmt.intern('a'), pmt.intern('a'))
d = pmt.dict_add(d, pmt.intern('b'), pmt.intern('b'))
d = pmt.dict_add(d, pmt.intern('c'), pmt.intern('c'))
a = pmt.cons(d, pmt.make_u8vector(10, 10))
print 'd
I understand that it should bomb, but it doesn't if there are elements in
the dictionary of the pair generated by cons. that's the problem. calling
dict_keys should die on both tests, but returns just fine on the first
test.
On Dec 9, 2016 1:35 PM, "Martin Braun" wrote:
On 12/05/2016 01:56 PM,
On 12/05/2016 01:56 PM, Dave NotTelling wrote:
> Marcus & Martin:
>
> I tried the dict_keys() method of checking, but even that can
> fail. Here is an example:
>
> [code]
>
> import pmt
>
> d = pmt.make_dict()
> d = pmt.dict_add(d, pmt.intern('a'), pmt.intern('a'))
> d = pmt.dict_add(d, p
Thoughts?
On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 4:56 PM, Dave NotTelling wrote:
> Marcus & Martin:
>
> I tried the dict_keys() method of checking, but even that can fail.
> Here is an example:
>
> [code]
>
> import pmt
>
> d = pmt.make_dict()
> d = pmt.dict_add(d, pmt.intern('a'), pmt.intern('a'))
> d = p
Marcus & Martin:
I tried the dict_keys() method of checking, but even that can fail.
Here is an example:
[code]
import pmt
d = pmt.make_dict()
d = pmt.dict_add(d, pmt.intern('a'), pmt.intern('a'))
d = pmt.dict_add(d, pmt.intern('b'), pmt.intern('b'))
d = pmt.dict_add(d, pmt.intern('c'), pm
Thanks for the explanation!
On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 5:29 PM, Marcus Müller
wrote:
> That's a long story. Essentially, a list is a pair of the first element
> and a pair of a second element and a pair of the third element and a pair
> of …
>
> Cheers,
> Marcus
>
> On 22.11.2016 23:18, Dave NotTel
That's a long story. Essentially, a list is a pair of the first element
and a pair of a second element and a pair of the third element and a
pair of …
Cheers,
Marcus
On 22.11.2016 23:18, Dave NotTelling wrote:
> I ask because it feels like a bug. Things like ((a . b), (c . d), (e
> . f)) are de
I remember writing this (UHD code), and at the time, I thought I could
fix PMTs first, but then decided it was too invasive. I would have to go
over the exercise again to tell you exactly why.
You're right, it feels like a bug. Probably, this was not by design, but
is an artefact of how PMT types
I ask because it feels like a bug. Things like ((a . b), (c . d), (e . f))
are definitely not pairs (assuming a pair is 2 elements) and (in my
opinion) should not return true for pmt.is_pair().
On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Dave NotTelling
wrote:
> Martin,
>
> Was that done on purpose?
Martin,
Was that done on purpose?
Thank you for the link! I hadn't thought about checking that way.
Thanks!
-Dave
On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Martin Braun
wrote:
> Dave,
>
> pairs pass is_dict(), which is possibly the root cause here. See also:
> https://github.com/gnuradio/g
Dave,
pairs pass is_dict(), which is possibly the root cause here. See also:
https://github.com/gnuradio/gnuradio/blob/31b28f0cf4694378b26617616d08b4082668962f/gr-uhd/lib/usrp_block_impl.cc#L487-L494
Cheers,
M
On 11/22/2016 01:47 PM, Dave NotTelling wrote:
> I noticed today that the is_dict and
13 matches
Mail list logo
