| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Implement warnings for types without definitions without constraining
where type definitions must appear.
We also eliminate the anti-pattern where a change in layer 10 had its
test in layer 11 (commit 1383).
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This bit me in the last commit for the first time.
Layer 010vm.cc is starting to look weird. It has references to stuff
that gets implemented much later, like containers and exclusive
containers. Its helpers are getting an increasing amount of logic. And
it has no tests.
I'm still inclined to think it's useful to have major data structures in
one place, even if they aren't used for a bit. But those helpers should
perhaps move out somehow or get some tests in the same layer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
After like 40 seconds (because of the 120-column screen), but whatever.
The final bug was that clear-screen wasn't actually working right for
fake screens.
(The trace is too large for github, so I'm going to leave it out for
now.)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
..now that we support non-integers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This is a far cleaner way to provide *some* floating-point support. We
can only represent signed integers up to 2^51 rather than 2^63. But in
exchange we don't have to worry about it elsewhere, and it's probably
faster than checking tag bits in every operation.
Hmm, yeah, surprised how easy this was. I think I'll give up on the
other approach.
I still don't have non-integer literals. But we won't bother with those
until we need them. `3.14159:literal` seems ugly.
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
I added one test to check that divide can return a float, then hacked at
the rippling failures across the entire entire codebase until all tests
pass. Now I need to look at the changes I made and see if there's a
system to them, identify other places that I missed, and figure out the
best way to cover all cases. I also need to show real rather than
encoded values in the traces, but I can't use value() inside reagent
methods because of the name clash with the member variable. So let's
take a snapshot before we attempt any refactoring. This was non-trivial
to get right.
Even if I convince myself that I've gotten it right, I might back this
all out if I can't easily *persuade others* that I've gotten it right.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
On my ubuntu 14.04.1 + gcc 4.8.2 machine, ifstream doesn't actually
raise an error on trying to open a non-existent file until you try to do
something with it. Garbage!
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Also a bugfix in break to label, because I noticed the screen wasn't
being cleaned up on quit.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Still need a nice syntax for managing the routine under test.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Useful check:
$ grep "[^ '\"]\[[^\"]" *.cc \
|perl -pwe 's/\Wargv\[|\WTests\[|\Wframe\[|\WMemory\[|\WName\[|\WSurrounding_space\[|\WRecipe\[|\WType\[|\WRecipe_number\[|\WType_number\[|\WBefore_fragments\[|\WAfter_fragments\[//g' \
|perl -pwe 's/\Wargv\[|\WTests\[|\Wframe\[|\WMemory\[|\WName\[|\WSurrounding_space\[|\WRecipe\[|\WType\[|\WRecipe_number\[|\WType_number\[|\WBefore_fragments\[|\WAfter_fragments\[//g' \
|grep '[^ ]\['
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
All primitives now always write to all their products. If a product is
not used that's fine, but if an instruction seems to expect too many
products mu will complain.
In the process, many primitives can operate on more than two ingredients
where it seems intuitive. You can add or divide more than two numbers
together, copy or negate multiple corresponding locations, etc.
There's one remaining bit of ugliness. Some instructions like
get/get-address, index/index-address, wait-for-location, these can
unnecessarily load values from memory when they don't need to.
Useful vim commands:
%s/ingredients\[\([^\]]*\)\]/ingredients.at(\1)/gc
%s/products\[\([^\]]*\)\]/products.at(\1)/gc
.,$s/\[\(.\)]/.at(\1)/gc
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
I spent a couple of hours debugging this because routine-state only
sometimes writes to its product. This is unacceptable. Fix this first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Just to put all our new test primitives through their paces, and iron
out any kinks.
Just the one chessboard scenario is taking 1.5-2.5x all the tests we've
written so far. But we're starting from a faster baseline, that was the
point of the C++ port. I also have -O3 optimizations in my back-pocket.
|
|
I've tried to update the Readme, but there are at least a couple of issues.
|