On Thu Oct 23 01:38:59 2008, mgrimes wrote:
Christoph,
Thanks for your help. This has been a great, low intensity, way to
learn a bit of parrot.
I think I have addressed everything, and I have attached a new patch.
The patch no longer applies cleanly to objects.t, and I thought
it'd be
On Thu Oct 16 17:43:28 2008, mgrimes wrote:
Hi,
The attached patch converts two perl based tests into parrot tests:
t/pmc/string.t
t/pmc/objects.t
Each of these included pir_error_is type tests. I am not aware of
any way to test those within parrot right now, so I kept them in perl
On Tue Oct 07 06:53:58 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In fixing the Complex PMC in r31749, I revealed a problem in our
read-only PMC tests. In t/pmc/ro.t, test 5 gets an error as expected,
but the error it gets complains that add_p_ic_p doesn't exist (it hasn't
existed for years, if ever).
On Mon Oct 13 07:31:30 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Christoph,
I send you the patch atached.
The script with TODO block works equal without it(with TODO
gives more information and adds the not yet implemented leyend).
Sincerely,
Igor
Hi Igor,
This patch looks good. There's no
On Sun Sep 14 13:43:15 2008, cotto wrote:
On Sun Sep 14 07:47:34 2008, pmichaud wrote:
On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 12:41:42AM -0700, Christoph Otto via RT wrote:
I got impatient and committed this as r31101. I'm marking this
ticket
as resolved.
According to [1], r31101 causes
On Tue Apr 08 19:11:10 2008, pmichaud wrote:
On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 02:15:26PM -0700, Christoph Otto (Volt) wrote:
When running the following PIR code, Parrot does the Perlish thing
and implicitly converts s to an int. This violates the principle
of least surprise and makes it
On Sat Oct 11 05:07:25 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Christoph Otto (via RT) wrote:
In response to a question about comparison operators in Pipp*,
Allison
suggested that I add a variant cmp VTABLE function which returns a
PMC instead
of an INTVAL. This patch adds such a function
On Thu Sep 25 15:09:30 2008, geraud wrote:
I reported a problem on IRC yesterday and was prompted to file a bug.
So here we go.
The GeJ reports that this test is passing now so I'm marking this ticket
resolved.
On Thu Sep 25 14:18:40 2008, julianalbo wrote:
I suspect the problem is that the integer greater than operation
is performing a subtraction between the two (signed long) values
being compared, but the result of the subtraction is outside of
the range of signed longs.
Correct. Fixed in
On Wed Sep 24 10:47:16 2008, cotto wrote:
On Mon Feb 18 18:07:43 2008, coke wrote:
On Feb 18, 2008 8:39 PM, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 15 February 2008 11:35:04 Will Coleda wrote:
According to http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/index.html#DIR, looks
like
as of gcc
On Thu Aug 07 14:20:11 2008, coke wrote:
Open a ticket for TODO item.
-- Forwarded message --
From: jerry gay [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: time op inconsistent on Win32
To: Ron Blaschke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Jonathan Worthington [EMAIL
On Mon Oct 22 09:47:52 2007, pcoch wrote:
In src/pmc/fixedbooleanarray.pmc there is the todo item;
* TODO merge this with functions from BigInt PMC
The functionality in this file should be merged with that in the
BigInt PMC
I propose to reject this ticket. Reducing code duplication is a
On Mon Feb 18 18:07:43 2008, coke wrote:
On Feb 18, 2008 8:39 PM, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 15 February 2008 11:35:04 Will Coleda wrote:
According to http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/index.html#DIR, looks like
as of gcc 4.2.3 (but not 4.1.2), we can use the following
On Fri Sep 12 10:06:01 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
src/library.c (and others?) refer to .past files, which are no longer
used. remove all references to this filetype from the parrot repo.
~jerry
This one should be closeable as of r31284. I tried acking through all
instances of the string
On Wed Sep 17 16:57:06 2008, cotto wrote:
On Mon Oct 01 10:40:33 2007, pcoch wrote:
In src/exceptions.c there is the todo comment: [TODO: replace
quadratic search with something linear, hopefully without trashing
abstraction layers
I can't find this comment any more, nor any occurrence
On Thu Sep 18 08:52:10 2008, julianalbo wrote:
I changed the fix in r31230 to allocate char instead of char *,
adjusted the formula for buffer size and added a comment explaining it
to lower the level of black magic, and added a check for each item,
dropping the XXX comment that asked for it.
On Thu Jan 18 14:14:30 2007, mdiep wrote:
On Thu Jan 18 13:52:33 2007, leo wrote:
While that was never actually specced, I do consider a NULL PMC as
something
like a null pointer in C. Any access (except testing for NULL-ness)
to
it is
an error. Above example tests, that some usage of
On Tue Sep 09 15:06:38 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
Just for clarification: IIUC, the n_* opcodes and their semantics
aren't really going away -- they're simply being renamed to not
have the leading n_ prefix. It's the existing add, sub,
mul, div, etc.
On Wed Sep 17 08:31:26 2008, particle wrote:
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 11:45 PM, Christoph Otto via RT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue Sep 16 15:00:24 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday 16 September 2008 14:47:58 NotFound wrote:
It certainly shouldn't segfault. But, the question
On Mon Oct 01 10:40:33 2007, pcoch wrote:
In src/exceptions.c there is the todo comment: [TODO: replace
quadratic search with something linear, hopefully without trashing
abstraction layers
I can't find this comment any more, nor any occurrence of this ticket's
number. I'll do some digging
On Mon Sep 15 20:08:38 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
chromatic wrote:
On Monday 15 September 2008 01:25:15 Christoph Otto via RT wrote:
It applies with a little noise to the current trunk and passes make
test. The attached version just changes line numbers so the patch
applies without
On Tue Sep 16 15:00:24 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday 16 September 2008 14:47:58 NotFound wrote:
It certainly shouldn't segfault. But, the question is: why does it
segfault at 206 parameters? Throwing an exception to avoid an
error we
don't understand isn't good for the
On Sun Jan 13 05:38:42 2008, coke wrote:
--
Will Coke Coleda
On Jan 12, 2008, at 7:33 PM, chromatic (via RT) parrotbug-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
# New Ticket Created by chromatic
# Please include the string: [perl #49722]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence
On Thu Sep 11 23:15:50 2008, cotto wrote:
On Mon Sep 08 22:54:28 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
Fixing this shouldn't be all that difficult -- in particular,
I think that src/pmc/resizablepmcarray.pmc lines 205-206 should
be changed from
- if
On Mon Sep 08 22:54:28 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
Fixing this shouldn't be all that difficult -- in particular,
I think that src/pmc/resizablepmcarray.pmc lines 205-206 should
be changed from
- if (key = PMC_int_val(SELF))
-
On Mon Aug 06 06:08:54 2007, pcoch wrote:
In the file t/distro/test_file_coverage.t there is the todo item:
# TODO: DYNPMC, DYNOPS, etc
This is in the context of making sure that the files match the test
files. This needs to be implemented.
Is this as simple as writing a test to make
On Mon Mar 19 10:22:42 2007, coke wrote:
test TODOd for next release, thanks for the report.
(Hopefully it'll get fixed shortly after the release.)
On Sun Mar 18 08:07:05 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I get SIGSEGV in t/stm/llqueue, test #2
openSuSe 10.2 linux 2.6.18.8-0.1-xen i686
On Tue Nov 20 20:58:35 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed Mar 14 07:49:33 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Given the following:
.namespace ['A']
.sub 'morph' :method :vtable
say 'morphing!'
.end
.sub main :main
$P0 = newclass 'A'
$P1 = new 'A'
On Sun Sep 07 15:19:22 2008, cotto wrote:
On Thu Jun 12 10:23:06 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 12 June 2008 10:01:21 NotFound wrote:
Some more details: adding:
Parrot_set_flag(interp, PARROT_DESTROY_FLAG);
in src/main.c it segfaults also when executing with
On Fri Sep 05 00:18:19 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bob Rogers wrote:
From: chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fixed in r30286.
-- c
Terrific; thanks. (Especially since it looks like something I may
have
seen in other circumstances, but could not reproduce.)
On Mon Sep 08 00:01:08 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Christoph Otto wrote:
If those are your thoughts on the subject, then it seems to make sense
to add the pdd format test to make test. The attached patch does this.
I'll apply it and mark this ticket as resolved before the next
On Mon Sep 08 01:18:37 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Christoph Otto via RT wrote:
Is this something we want to go ahead with or should this ticket be
rejected?
I've had it on my hiveminder todo list for over a month now. The problem
is, it's not only a matter of annoying fiddly
On Mon Sep 08 00:12:44 2008, cotto wrote:
On Mon Sep 08 00:01:08 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Christoph Otto wrote:
If those are your thoughts on the subject, then it seems to make
sense
to add the pdd format test to make test. The attached patch does
this.
I'll apply it and
On Mon Jul 07 00:13:20 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sunday 06 July 2008 22:17:12 Andrew Johnson via RT wrote:
On Sun Jul 06 11:03:37 2008, japhb wrote:
Better yet, we should replace the inherently insecure quicksort
algorithm (insecure in the vulnerable to algorithmic attack
On Mon Sep 08 04:23:37 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Applied in r30888. cotto is going to check its functioning on Cygwin,
but it did no harm on Darwin and Linux, so I'm committing it now.
Thank you very much.
kid51
It looks good on Cygwin too, so I'm marking this resolved.
On Fri Sep 05 12:16:25 2008, cotto wrote:
On Tue May 27 13:33:11 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Running this program:
sub foo($a) {say $a} ; my $x = ;
on Ubuntu 8.04 with latest Parrot from svn gives this:
$ ./perl6 test.p6
Statement not terminated properly at line 1, near
On Mon Apr 09 01:29:52 2007, pcoch wrote:
In the file src/ops/debug.ops in the debug_break() op, there is an
explicit exit(0), which is marked as being not an ok thing to do.
This issue needs to be investigated and fixed.
It looks like the explicit exit in debug_break() is gone, so I'm marking
On Tue Sep 11 03:32:51 2007, pcoch wrote:
Having a look through PDD03 I noticed the TODO item left by Chip:
=head3 Overflow
If too many values are provided to fit into the given target
registers, Parrot
will throw an exception. Note that if the final target is a P
register with
On Thu Feb 21 12:15:06 2008, Whiteknight wrote:
What would be the best way to handle this? We certainly don't need to do
anything on systems where INT_MAX == -INT_MIN, but a simple compiler
directive should help to detect that case.
In the event that abs(INT_MIN) abs(INT_MAX), should we
On Mon Oct 22 07:01:59 2007, pcoch wrote:
In src/pmc/hash.pmc:thaw() there is the todo item:
/* TODO make a better interface for hash creation
... do this.
Where do we want to go with this?
On Sat Sep 06 15:51:16 2008, julianalbo wrote:
Sorry, the code I poste was bad. The valid form is:
$P1 = new ['Exception'], $P0 # create new exception object
I've changed the example code to use the more common syntax without
brackets:
$P1 = new 'Exception', $P0
. The code works now, so
On Tue Feb 05 06:50:24 2008, coke wrote:
On Wed Aug 16 23:09:16 2006, mdiep wrote:
I don't know how to write a test for this off the top of my head, but
Iterator and DynLexPad don't play well together atm. When I tried, I
got this error:
elements() not implemented in class
On Sat May 17 14:55:53 2008, pmichaud wrote:
On Mon Jun 12 16:30:13 2006, jonathan wrote:
Both Parrot_store_global and store_sub call
Parrot_invalidate_method_cache,
however the versions of these that take keys (Parrot_store_global_p and
store_sub_p) fail to do so.
Is this ticket
On Sat Jul 05 02:53:11 2008, bernhard wrote:
In runtime/parrot/library/config.pir I encountered the comment.
XXX hash should probably be marked read-only..
This should be investigated.
Regards,
Bernhard
This seems to be a very sane suggestion. It's implemented and has a
test
On Tue Aug 26 18:39:55 2008, rgrjr wrote:
From: Klaas-Jan Stol (via RT) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 04:46:56 -0700
From PDD19:
Identifiers don't have any limit on length at the moment, but some
sane-but-generous length limit may be imposed in the future (256
On Wed May 10 11:01:34 2006, stmpeters wrote:
I'm taking a look at it. I should have something working this evening
for the configs. Adding the HAS_BLAH's will take some additional time.
Steve Peters
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
when useful is vague does not indicate why the extra configuration
On Tue Aug 05 04:09:14 2008, tene wrote:
pdd23:
Exception handlers can resume execution immediately after the
throw opcode by invoking the resume continuation which is stored
in the exception object. That continuation must be invoked with no
parameters; in other words, throw never returns
On Thu Jun 12 10:23:06 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 12 June 2008 10:01:21 NotFound wrote:
Some more details: adding:
Parrot_set_flag(interp, PARROT_DESTROY_FLAG);
in src/main.c it segfaults also when executing with perl6.pbc, and
also a lot of parrot test fails.
So
On Wed Apr 16 14:24:28 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 16 April 2008 10:49:15 Christoph Otto (Volt) wrote:
The perl6 stand-alone binary chokes on chromatic's mmd example
(http://www.oreillynet.com/onlamp/blog/2008/04/multiple_dispatch_now_please
.html) under linux/x86. The
On Tue Mar 18 14:05:34 2008, rurban wrote:
It's time to use Configure.pl with the option --without-crypto
Or to add -lcrypto to the cmdline.
Configure.pl fails to pick it up apparently.
my %Parrot::Config::Generated::PConfig contains -lcrypto in libs
'libs' = '-ldl -lcrypt -lgmp
On Mon Dec 10 08:52:27 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Marton Papp has successfully compiled Parrot with LLVM on Windows with
mingw-make (it's failing 18 tests, which is impressively low for a first
run on a new compiler). Below is his summary of the steps he followed.
I'd like to extract
On Wed Dec 05 04:53:15 2007, pcoch wrote:
In languages/pugs/pmc/pugscapture.pmc there are todo items of the form:
/* XXX Warning: use of uninitialized value */
This looks very similar to RT#48170 which was in the regex language. Does
this todo item mean that we should be *warning* about
On Fri Sep 05 00:58:51 2008, cotto wrote:
On Fri Aug 01 06:44:05 2008, coke wrote:
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 7:35 PM, James Keenan via RT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Coke: Given the points Leo made and the fact that there has been
nothing from the OP in 4 years, can we close this ticket?
On Fri Feb 15 02:43:05 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
They're marked as MMD in vtable.tbl, so my guess is that they're not
directly
callable by vtable pointer from C. Fdocs/mmd.pod (though admittedly
out of
date) suggests that mmd_dispatch_* is the right approach.
-- c
Sounds good
On Tue May 27 13:33:11 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Running this program:
sub foo($a) {say $a} ; my $x = ;
on Ubuntu 8.04 with latest Parrot from svn gives this:
$ ./perl6 test.p6
Statement not terminated properly at line 1, near = ;\n
current instr.: 'parrot;PGE::Util;die' pc
On Mon Jun 02 13:08:27 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday 02 June 2008 12:27:17 Bernhard Schmalhofer wrote:
The behavior of
.sub main
$N0 = 3.14159
say $N0
print $N0
print \n
.end
surprised me, as I got:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/devel/Parrot/trunk$ uname -a
On Mon Apr 14 08:07:32 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 11:40:01AM +0530, Senaka Fernando wrote:
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 6:33 AM, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Thanks, applied as r26965, except for the patch to
compilers/imcc/imclexer.c, which is a
On Wed Dec 05 04:49:22 2007, pcoch wrote:
In languages/pugs/pmc/pugscapture.pmc:retval() there is the todo item:
/* XXX getting non existent value, exception or undef?
It looks like we need to determine at this point whether or not the value
we are getting doesn't exist, is an exception,
On Mon May 19 03:55:46 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun May 18 17:02:30 2008, ajr wrote:
t\benchmark\benchmarks..28/37
# Failed test 'examples/benchmarks/primes2.pasm'
# at t\benchmark\benchmarks.t line 219.
# Exited with error code: 1
I think this problem is not
On Tue May 13 08:05:08 2008, coke wrote:
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 9:48 AM, via RT Patrick R. Michaud
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
# New Ticket Created by Patrick R. Michaud
# Please include the string: [perl #54110]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this
issue.
#
On Sun May 04 03:11:12 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Excellent, the patch from ticket 52214 works.
Walter
resolved
On Sat Feb 16 17:23:47 2008, coke wrote:
The example in the PDD now reads:
$P0 = new 'String'
$P0 = something bad happened
$P1 = new ['parrot';'exception'], $P0 # create new exception object
throw $P1 # throw it
This code continues to not work.
On Fri Apr 04 16:52:39 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri Apr 04 04:30:17 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One (possibly solvable) problem is that subversion tags don't
substitute properly in the HTML generated versions on the website
On Fri Aug 01 06:44:05 2008, coke wrote:
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 7:35 PM, James Keenan via RT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Coke: Given the points Leo made and the fact that there has been
nothing from the OP in 4 years, can we close this ticket?
Thanks.
kid51
Just because there's
On Mon Jul 14 13:47:29 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Seems to be fixed as of 29440:
Sounds like a happy ending. resolved
On Fri Jun 27 13:14:53 2008, coke wrote:
While I think this particular example is now valid with the new calling
conventions, you can get a similar effect with:
METHOD BORK BORK parent() {
/* nothing to see here*/
}
This ticket doesn't seem to be closeable as is. Would it be good
On Tue Jul 29 00:38:29 2008, tuxdna wrote:
I found that it is now working correctly in the latest revision 29838.
resolved
On Wed Aug 27 22:49:37 2008, cotto wrote:
Most of these test wouldn't throw an exception anyway, since assigning
to a positive out-of-bounds element simply resizes the array. (This
excludes nonsensically large positive indicies, which should probably
tested for.) I added exception handling
On Thu Oct 25 00:49:38 2007, pcoch wrote:
To be totally honest I wish I knew. I'm just going through converting
the todo items in code into RT tickets and sometimes the todo comments
aren't necessarily all that clear as to what needs to be done. I'm
also (unfortunately) not familiar enough
On Mon Aug 04 16:29:03 2008, coke wrote:
As I mentioned on IRC, I'd recommend just removing it instead of
adding another probe we're not sure we need. We can always come back
to this ticket and grab your patch for later application if it we need
to.
Good enough. Andy (who originally wrote
On Tue Jul 29 07:46:08 2008, coke wrote:
Make this ticket one of the children ticket of the META pdd25cx merge
ticket, we can close it out after the merge removes it.
Allison++'s merge removed shift_pmc from src/pmc/exception.pmc, so this
ticket is now rejected.
On Thu Dec 06 08:54:35 2007, pcoch wrote:
Many files in the Parrot repository are lacking descriptions within the
pod DESCRIPTION section. This needs to be done. An appropriate
description
of what the given file does is all that is necessary.
r29788 adds a test for this. Unless the test is
On Thu Jul 24 23:21:19 2008, cotto wrote:
I agreee. I ran with a few different runcores and always got 1000 as
the number (when Parrot ran and I was patient enough to wait for the
output). It was the same for cgoto, cgp, fast, slow and switch.
I ran the following with a normal build of
On Sat Jul 26 14:34:26 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd write that as:
if (ret)
return *(INTVAL *)ret;
return (INTVAL)0;
The pointer casting dereferencing bothers me a little, but if
compilers don't
warn about it
-- c
That looks cleaner. I made
On Fri Jul 25 11:06:01 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 11:05:28PM -0700, Christoph Otto via RT wrote:
From what I can tell, t/src/list.t was deleted or moved sometime
after
r22464. Searching for some of the more unique-looking strings in
that
revision of the file
On Thu Jul 03 14:15:22 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(sorry if this arrives multiple times, br0ken ISP and all..)
Hi,
Although there are some similar tests in t/00-parrot/ I wouldn't start
adding more in this file, because the official test suite lives in the
pugs repository under t/spec
On Fri Jul 25 14:13:59 2008, japhb wrote:
On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 22:18 +0200, Peter Gibbs wrote:
typedef HUGEINTVAL(*sprintf_getint_t) (PARROT_INTERP,INTVAL,
SPRINTF_OBJ *);
So, since obj-getint returns a HUGEINTVAL, I gave it one to store the
result in.
Fair enough, that's
On Wed Oct 24 12:53:42 2007, pcoch wrote:
In t/src/list.t there is the todo item:
# TODO
which says much in little i.e.: improve the test coverage of the list_*
functionality.
From what I can tell, t/src/list.t was deleted or moved sometime after
r22464. Searching for some of the more
On Thu Jun 05 19:07:49 2008, coke wrote:
We can always improve the diagnostic emitted by the PMC compiler.
Mismatched strings are going to be an issue whether they're in a
CONST_STRING declaration or just an assignment to char *.
So, no, it's not worth fixing up c2str.pl, IMO.
So if it's
On Sat Dec 08 18:24:17 2007, petdance wrote:
In intlist_get(), we call list_get() which can return a NULL.
Then, the result is checked against -1, and then
dereferenced.
I suspect that check against -1 should actually be a
check against NULL, but don't know enough to prove it
and
On Thu May 15 10:24:00 2008, julianalbo wrote:
On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 5:28 PM, via RT Paul Cochrane
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
# XXX
# in plain functional run-loop result is 999
# other run-loops report 998
# TODO investigate this after interpreter strtup is done
# see also TODO in
On Thu Jun 14 16:25:24 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 14 June 2007 14:42:31 Jurosz Michal wrote:
Attached test use compreg P1, PASM and invokecc it 100,000 times.
On win32 (mingw32) it consumes 70MB of RAM with r18834 (107 MB of
RAM
with r11704).
With Linux at r19010, the
On Tue Sep 04 11:40:30 2007, rblasch wrote:
The key here is the model. While Coverity's model captures the
Cfree quite correctly, I don't think it recognizes the pointer update
in the double linked list, which is done in Csubst_ins, as important.
Coverity probably sees something like the
On Thu Jul 06 09:21:34 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With parrot r13181, binding to a non-privileged port on localhost
consistently fails with EADDRNOTAVAIL on Mac OS X and FreeBSD boxes
for Intel and PPC platforms. The same command succeeds on Linux.
Steps to reproduce:
1) ./parrot
On Tue Jul 22 23:24:10 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It works for me too on Mac OSX 10.4 and parrot rev 29370.
Thanks for following up!
Chris
It just goes to show that all problems (even interpersonal ones) go away
if you ignore them for long enough. I'm marking this one as resolved.
On Tue Jul 22 23:34:13 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This patch contains a fix and a simplification. It should now be
cross-platform and thread-safe. I'll test on some other *nixes and go
on from
there. If nothing else it works fine on Ubuntu/x86.
It also works in FreeBSD 7.0 and
On Thu Jul 17 15:53:12 2008, julianalbo wrote:
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 9:59 PM, Christoph Otto via RT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With this patch, the new tests still pass on Linux/x86. The patch uses
STRING-strstart to avoid leaking a malloc'd buffer when throwing an
exception, which may
On Tue Feb 19 16:19:14 2008, Whiteknight wrote:
On Mon Oct 22 09:49:02 2007, ptc wrote:
In src/pmc/file.pmc there is the todo item:
/* XXX Check if we need to deallocate strerror strings */
Do this.
According to:
http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/clibrary/cstring/strerror.html
On Wed Apr 23 18:18:00 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This thread trailed off about 4 months ago. Could we get an update on
its status, i.e., whether it should be applied, what OSes it's passing
on, etc.
Thank you very much.
kid51
The tests passed because the strerror/strerror_r code
On Thu Jul 17 01:17:51 2008, cotto wrote:
On Wed Apr 23 18:18:00 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This thread trailed off about 4 months ago. Could we get an update on
its status, i.e., whether it should be applied, what OSes it's passing
on, etc.
Thank you very much.
kid51
The
On Wed Jul 09 00:04:45 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
r29183 adds a test to t/pmc/array.t that exposes some brokenness in
the Array
PMC's freeze/thaw code path. I added the test because it looked like
Array's
freeze/thaw/visit code had no test coverage. It turns out that
list_visit
also
On Mon Feb 13 13:05:01 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
all PMCs (src/pmc/*.pmc) should be tested. the basic types, as defined
in PDD17 (docs/pdds/clip/pdd17_basic_types.pod) should be given higher
priority, so tests should be developed first to cover these.
not surprisingly, basic types have
On Wed Oct 24 14:23:23 2007, pcoch wrote:
In t/pmc/resizeablebooleanarray.t there is the todo item:
TODO: {
local $TODO = this is broken;
pasm_output_is( 'CODE', 'OUTPUT', clone );
Which is to say, fix cloning in ResizableBooleanArrays or fix the test (or
both?)
It looks like both
On Sun Jul 13 23:26:51 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1 for modifying the test, not the macros.
-- c
Resloved.
On Fri Jul 11 14:00:12 2008, cotto wrote:
On Fri Jul 11 05:29:20 2008, coke wrote:
Belatedly add Moritz's response to the ticket.
A fix for this bug was committed in r29289 which looks like it will
resolve this issue. If that's the case, this ticket can be closed.
Since there haven't
On Thu Feb 21 13:52:31 2008, coke wrote:
On Fri Nov 02 07:56:44 2007, particle wrote:
as per PDD07 (r22655,) c macro args *must* be wrapped in parens inside
macro bodies, to allow expressions passed as macro parameters.
for example, i expect:
#define CLASS_has_alien_parents_TEST(o)
On Fri Jul 11 05:29:20 2008, coke wrote:
Belatedly add Moritz's response to the ticket.
A fix for this bug was committed in r29289 which looks like it will
resolve this issue. If that's the case, this ticket can be closed.
On Thu Jun 12 09:56:55 2008, nahoo wrote:
Does this suggest that the patch is moot, and that we may close the
ticket?
yes.
Since the patch seem to have been applied without this ticket being
updated, I'm marking it as resolved now.
On Tue Jul 10 06:46:20 2007, pcoch wrote:
In the file lib/Parrot/Pmc2c.pm there is the todo item (within the
vtable_decl() sub):
# TODO gen C line comment
Implement this.
The todo is no longer there but the code doesn't generate a #line
directive either. Looking at the generated code
On Mon Apr 09 01:17:50 2007, pcoch wrote:
In the file src/ops/io.ops there is the todo item:
all results from string_to_cstring() need freeing
but this generates ugly warnings WRT discarding the const
qualifier
free the results but also without generating the warnings if
1 - 100 of 102 matches
Mail list logo
