about summary refs log tree commit diff stats
path: root/037recipe.cc
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAgeFilesLines
* 2295 - drop first-class recipes and continuationsKartik K. Agaram2015-10-281-52/+0
| | | | Making life too complex at this time.
* 2294Kartik K. Agaram2015-10-281-1/+3
| | | | Bah, sick of CALL and continuations.
* 2283 - represent each /property as a treeKartik K. Agaram2015-10-261-1/+1
|
* 2277 - reagents now have a tree of typesKartik K. Agaram2015-10-251-3/+3
|
* 2271 - bugfix: traces cross-contaminating errorsKartik K. Agaram2015-10-191-0/+5
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | There were several places where we push a call on to a routine without incrementing call-stack depth, which was used to compute the depth at which to trace an instruction. So sometimes you ended up one depth lower than you started a call with. Do this enough times and instructions that should be traced at level 100 end up at level 0 and pop up as errors. Solution: since call-stack depth is only used for tracing, include it in the trace stream and make sure we reset it along with the trace stream. Then catch all places where we forget to increment call-stack depth and make sure we catch such places in the future. When I first ran into this with Caleb I thought there must be some way that we're writing some output into the warnings result. I didn't recognize that the spurious output as part of the trace, just at the wrong level.
* 2262 - strengthen some type checksKartik K. Agaram2015-10-071-1/+10
|
* 2258 - separate warnings from errorsKartik K. Agaram2015-10-061-2/+2
| | | | | | | At the lowest level I'm reluctantly starting to see the need for errors that stop the program in its tracks. Only way to avoid memory corruption and security issues. But beyond that core I still want to be as lenient as possible at higher levels of abstraction.
* 2232Kartik K. Agaram2015-10-011-9/+10
|
* 2226 - standardize warning formatKartik K. Agaram2015-10-011-2/+2
| | | | | | | | Always show recipe name where error occurred. But don't show internal 'interactive' name for sandboxes, that's just confusing. What started out as warnings are now ossifying into errors that halt all execution. Is this how things went with C and Unix as well?
* 2137Kartik K. Agaram2015-09-031-1/+0
|
* 1868 - start using naked literals everywhereKartik K. Agaram2015-07-281-2/+2
| | | | First step to reducing typing burden. Next step: inferring types.
* 1848 - core instructions now check for ingredientsKartik K. Agaram2015-07-251-2/+10
| | | | Also standardized warnings.
* 1829Kartik K. Agaram2015-07-231-1/+1
|
* 1711 - start adding methods to editor-data objectsKartik K. Agaram2015-07-051-4/+6
| | | | The menu bar needs separate recipes to render and respond to events.
* 1702 - experiment: start using 'ordinal' in namesKartik K. Agaram2015-07-041-5/+5
| | | | | | | 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!
* 1701Kartik K. Agaram2015-07-041-4/+4
|
* 1699 - first-class recipe typesKartik K. Agaram2015-07-031-0/+51
It should now be easy to do dynamic dispatch, create higher-order functions, etc.