| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| * | 2735 - define recipes using 'def' | Kartik K. Agaram | 2016-03-08 | 1 | -1/+1 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | I'm dropping all mention of 'recipe' terminology from the Readme. That way I hope to avoid further bike-shedding discussions while I very slowly decide on the right terminology with my students. I could be smarter in my error messages and use 'recipe' when code uses it and 'function' otherwise. But what about other words like ingredient? It would all add complexity that I'm not yet sure is worthwhile. But I do want separate experiences for veteran programmers reading about Mu on github and for people learning programming using Mu. | ||||
| * | 2697 | Kartik K. Agaram | 2016-02-24 | 1 | -3/+9 |
| | | |||||
| * | 2681 - drop reagent types from reagent properties | Kartik K. Agaram | 2016-02-21 | 1 | -3/+2 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | All my attempts at staging this change failed with this humongous commit that took all day and involved debugging three monstrous bugs. Two of the bugs had to do with forgetting to check the type name in the implementation of shape-shifting recipes. Bug #2 in particular would cause core tests in layer 59 to fail -- only when I loaded up edit/! It got me to just hack directly on mu.cc until I figured out the cause (snapshot saved in mu.cc.modified). The problem turned out to be that I accidentally saved a type ingredient in the Type table during specialization. Now I know that that can be very bad. I've checked the traces for any stray type numbers (rather than names). I also found what might be a bug from last November (labeled TODO), but we'll verify after this commit. | ||||
| * | 2677 | Kartik K. Agaram | 2016-02-20 | 1 | -1/+1 |
| | | | | | Include type names in the type tree. Though we aren't using them yet. | ||||
| * | 2317 | Kartik K. Agaram | 2015-10-29 | 1 | -0/+42 |