| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This reinfoces that it's only really intended to be used by
'wait-for-location'. To reinforce that we also move it to the same layer
as 'wait-for-location'.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This pass will need redesigning for 'put'. But let's get rid of
get-address first..
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Phew!
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Turns out one of my chessboard tests has been silently deadlocking and
therefore not actually checking its results since at least commit 1620
last June.
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Only apps left now, and the wait-for-location uses in the channel
primitives.
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
On reflection I think I'd rather add a duplicate test that's closer to
how I discovered the problem, without the masking bug in type-matching
that was masking the simpler test in the previous commit.
|
|
|
|
| |
Thanks Caleb Couch for finding and reporting this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
I have a tack now for issue 2 of 2829 (dealing with wait-for-location):
have get-address and index-address return a type that can't be looked
up. That way the worst that can happen with an address pointing to a
freed location is a routine that randomly hangs and starts working
again. And even that won't happen if you disallow transferring the new
type across routines in ingredients or channels, just like I plan to do
with 'address:shared'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Previously to watch an address we had to perform a lookup of it, which
the instruction then proceeded to undo. This way wait-for-instruction no
longer supports literal ingredients, but the real-world usage becomes
cleaner.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Thanks Ella and Caleb for finding this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
I'd started using size_of() in transforms at some point, but not gotten
around to actually updating it to support arrays before run-time. Wish
there was a way I could statically enforce that something is only called
at transform time vs runtime.
Thanks Ella and Caleb Couch for finding this issue. Static arrays are
likely still half-baked, but should get a thorough working-over in
coming weeks.
|
|
|
|
| |
Issue 1 in 2829 is now fixed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
1. It turns out we couldn't overload 'get' and 'get-address' until now,
because transform_names looks for those names, and the
resolve_ambiguous_calls transform happens before transform_names. Why
does resolve_ambiguous_calls happen before transform_names? Because if
my students made mistakes in the ingredients to an instruction they got
overzealous errors from resolve_ambiguous_calls. Now this impacts 'put'
as well, which is already overloaded for tables. Not sure what to do
about this; I'm going to go back to the overzealous errors, and just
teach students to visually scan past them for now.
2. I need addresses in a third place besides storing to containers and
arrays, and managing the heap -- to synchronize routines.
wait-for-location requires an address. Not sure what to do about this..
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Current plan:
- get rid of get-address and index-address, and therefore any address
that is not address:shared
- rename address:shared to just 'shared'
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Undo commit 9da3fc3118; looks like we don't need it anymore, and the
test was poorly done. Let's see if we hit the error again.
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Move all bounds checks for types and recipes to one place.
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|