about summary refs log tree commit diff stats
path: root/044space_surround.cc
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAgeFilesLines
* 3522Kartik K. Agaram2016-10-191-1/+1
|
* 3394Kartik K. Agaram2016-09-171-2/+2
|
* 3393Kartik K. Agaram2016-09-171-2/+2
|
* 3390Kartik K. Agaram2016-09-171-4/+4
|
* 3389Kartik K. Agaram2016-09-171-2/+2
|
* 3380Kartik K. Agaram2016-09-171-7/+7
| | | | | One more place we were missing expanding type abbreviations: inside container definitions.
* 3239Kartik K. Agaram2016-08-211-3/+3
|
* 3214Kartik K. Agaram2016-08-171-0/+3
|
* 2990Kartik K. Agaram2016-05-201-1/+1
| | | | | | | | | | Standardize quotes around reagents in error messages. I'm still sure there's issues. For example, the messages when type-checking 'copy'. I'm not putting quotes around them because in layer 60 I end up creating dilated reagents, and then it's a bit much to have quotes and (two kinds of) brackets. But I'm sure I'm doing that somewhere..
* 2864 - replace all address:shared with just addressKartik K. Agaram2016-04-241-4/+4
| | | | | | | Now that we no longer have non-shared addresses, we can just always track refcounts for all addresses. Phew!
* 2773 - switch to 'int'Kartik K. Agaram2016-03-131-7/+7
| | | | This should eradicate the issue of 2771.
* 2735 - define recipes using 'def'Kartik K. Agaram2016-03-081-3/+3
| | | | | | | | | | | | 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.
* 2712Kartik K. Agaram2016-02-261-1/+1
|
* 2707Kartik K. Agaram2016-02-251-4/+1
|
* 2681 - drop reagent types from reagent propertiesKartik K. Agaram2016-02-211-1/+1
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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.
* 2581 - make space for the refcount in address:sharedKartik K. Agaram2016-01-201-11/+19
| | | | | | | | | | | We don't yet actually maintain the refcount. That's next. Hardest part of this was debugging the assume-console scenarios in layer 85. That took some detailed manual diffing of traces (because the output of diff was no good). New tracing added in this commit add 8% to .traces LoC. Commented out trace() calls (used during debugging) make that 45%.
* 2576 - distinguish allocated addresses from othersKartik K. Agaram2016-01-191-2/+2
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | This is the one major refinement on the C programming model I'm planning to introduce in mu. Instead of Rust's menagerie of pointer types and static checking, I want to introduce just one new type, and use it to perform ref-counting at runtime. So far all we're doing is updating new's interface. The actual ref-counting implementation is next. One implication: I might sometimes need duplicate implementations for a recipe with allocated vs vanilla addresses of the same type. So far it seems I can get away with just always passing in allocated addresses; the situations when you want to pass an unallocated address to a recipe should be few and far between.
* 2571Kartik K. Agaram2016-01-191-0/+57
| | | | | Reorganize layers in preparation for a better way to manage heap allocations without ever risking use-after-free errors.
* 1768Kartik K. Agaram2015-07-131-60/+0
|
* 1434 - support all unicode spacesKartik K. Agaram2015-05-231-1/+9
|
* 1414 - traces now robust to new recipes/typesKartik K. Agaram2015-05-211-3/+3
|
* 1391 - avoid unsigned integersKartik K. Agaram2015-05-171-7/+7
|
* 1387Kartik K. Agaram2015-05-161-1/+1
|
* 1364 - trace call-stack when switching routinesKartik K. Agaram2015-05-131-1/+1
| | | | Drop the #$%# 'encapsulated' stack ADT.
* 1363 - rename 'integer' to 'number'Kartik K. Agaram2015-05-131-4/+4
| | | | ..now that we support non-integers.
* 1357 - temporarily revert floating-point supportKartik K. Agaram2015-05-121-2/+2
|
* 1356 - snapshot #2: floating point supportKartik K. Agaram2015-05-121-2/+2
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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.
* 1343Kartik K. Agaram2015-05-111-1/+1
|
* 1298 - better ingredient/product handlingKartik K. Agaram2015-05-071-2/+4
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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
* 1276 - make C++ version the defaultKartik K. Agaram2015-05-051-0/+50
I've tried to update the Readme, but there are at least a couple of issues.