about summary refs log tree commit diff stats
path: root/059shape_shifting_recipe.cc
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAgeFilesLines
* 2456Kartik K. Agaram2015-11-171-0/+19
|
* 2455 - first fix of another batch of crashesKartik K. Agaram2015-11-171-14/+37
|
* 2449Kartik K. Agaram2015-11-151-0/+1
|
* 2445 - dispatch between shape-shifting variantsKartik K. Agaram2015-11-151-5/+103
| | | | | Starting to leave debug prints around once again, just in case one of them is worth promoting to the trace..
* 2444Kartik K. Agaram2015-11-151-0/+12
| | | | Yet another bugfix as I trace through the last session with Caleb.
* 2443Kartik K. Agaram2015-11-151-12/+28
| | | | | Another little bit of polish: if a call doesn't do enough for a complete specialization, show a decent error message and above all: don't die!
* 2442Kartik K. Agaram2015-11-151-1/+17
| | | | | | Fix the drawback in the previous commit: if an ingredient is just a literal 0 we'll skip its type-checking and hope to map type ingredients elsewhere.
* 2441 - never miss any specializationsKartik K. Agaram2015-11-151-4/+44
| | | | | | | | | I was failing to specialize calls containing literals. And then I had to deal with whether literals should map to numbers or characters. (Answer: both.) One of the issues that still remains: shape-shifting recipes can't be called with literals for addresses, even if it's 0.
* 2438 - specialize inside header-less recipesKartik K. Agaram2015-11-141-1/+26
| | | | | | | What was I thinking with 2366? Thanks Caleb Couch. It turned out we couldn't call shape-shifting recipes inside the edit/ or sandbox/ apps.
* 2433 - temporarily undo 2432Kartik K. Agaram2015-11-131-11/+0
| | | | | | Lessons with Caleb uncovered a problem with type ingredients: I can call shape-shifting recipes like 'push' from the commandline but not inside the edit/ or sandbox/ apps.
* 2432 - first stab at making ingredients immutableKartik K. Agaram2015-11-131-0/+11
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | The rule is, an address ingredient is only modifiable if: a) it's also a product b) it's /contained-in some other ingredient+product Only if an ingredient is a modifiable can you: a) call get-address or index-address on it (the only way to write to it) b) call other recipes that also return it in a product I still don't check copies of the address. That's next. Core mu passes this check, but none of the example apps do. edit/ and sandbox/ are known to fail.
* 2421 - 'generic' => 'shape-shifting'Kartik K. Agaram2015-11-101-0/+444
More evocative, less jargony.