| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
| |
Not strictly necessary, but it might help me stage the introduction of
arrays and 'new'.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
This can happen if 'canonize' fails. Make sure it doesn't kill mu.
Thanks Caleb Couch.
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
More friendly way to 'stash' stuff in the trace so that you can toggle
lines of code to see their stashed traces.
|
| |
|
|
| |
Standardize test names.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Still need to fix all the todo's in edit.mu dealing with scrolling.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Still iterating on the right way to handle incorrect number of
ingredients. My first idea of creating null results doesn't really work
once they're used in later instructions. Just add a warning at one place
in the run loop, but otherwise only add products when there's something
to save in them.
Undoes some work around commit 1886.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
For example:
x:number <- index y:address:array:number, 3
(forgetting to do a lookup)
Thanks Caleb Couch.
|
| |
|
|
| |
First step to reducing typing burden. Next step: inferring types.
|
| |
|
|
| |
Also standardized warnings.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
More verbose, but it saves trouble when debugging; there's never
something you thought should be traced but just never came out the other
end.
Also got rid of fatal errors entirely. Everything's a warning now, and
code after a warning isn't guaranteed to run.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Eventually we might be able to get rid of die entirely.
This is just a preliminary stab at a random error. In the process I ran
into two issues that have impeded debugging before:
a) Naming conflicts within scenarios are a real no-no. I need to warn on
them, but the rules are getting complicated:
Always print warnings on redefine
But not in interactive mode
Or in scenarios checking warning behavior
Unless the scenario recipe itself is overridden
b) Now that we've added collect_layers and a long time can go between
traces, debugging is a minefield because trace lines don't print to
screen immediately after they're created. Need to do something about
that. Maybe explicitly trigger collection by tracing '\n' or something.
These are the next two items on my todo list.
|
| |
|
|
| |
I was counting locations when I should have been counting elements.
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
Current model: you click on something to put it on the editor at the top
of the column. Worth a shot.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
It comes up pretty early in the codebase, but hopefully won't come up
in the mu level until we get to higher-order recipes. Potentially
intimidating name, but such prime real estate with no confusing
overloadings in other projects!
|
| |
|
|
| |
For starters start making the test fail when building until layer 41.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
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).
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Since '3.14159:literal' looks ugly, we'll just say '3.14159'. It's not
like non-integers can be confused for anything but literals.
Once I tried to turn reagent values into doubles, I uncovered a bug:
arithmetic using signed integers is busted; if either operand of
subtraction is unsigned the result is unsigned as well. If it needs to
be negative: ka-boom. It was only masked because I was eventually
storing the result in a long long int, where it was out of range, and so
overflowing into the correct signed value. Once I switched to doubles
the unsigned value would indeed fit without overflowing. Ka-boom.
Yet another reminder that unsigned integers suck. I started using them
mostly to avoid warnings in loops when comparing with .size(), which is
usually a size_t.
Who knows what other crap lurks here. Just use signed integers
everywhere. (And avoid bitwise operators.)
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
..now that we support non-integers.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
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.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
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've tried to update the Readme, but there are at least a couple of issues.
|