about summary refs log tree commit diff stats
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAgeFilesLines
* 1126 - 'mu test x.mu' runs just scenarios in x.muKartik K. Agaram2015-04-226-27/+303
| | | | | | | Required still more tweaking of Recipe namespaces. Mindlessly inserting setup() took a couple of hours to debug because the test function and the function it was testing ended up getting the same recipe number, with the inevitable infinite loop :/
* 1125Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-222-28/+28
|
* 1124Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-222-5/+5
|
* 1123Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-221-1/+8
|
* 1122 - another potential out of bounds accessKartik K. Agaram2015-04-221-2/+6
| | | | | My methodology of tracing and testing isn't intended to eliminate undefined behavior. But mu will, eventually.
* 1121Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-222-0/+12
|
* 1120Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-221-8/+6
|
* 1119 - preparing to start porting chessboardKartik K. Agaram2015-04-213-22/+61
| | | | | | | | | Arc version is 15% faster (8.3s vs 9.9s for print-board test) if I use an intermediate array rather than list. I'm starting to question the whole tagged-value design, and the current tagged-value implementation was treating squares as integers in one place anyway, so its benefits for typing are not great. Might as well create a good baseline for the Arc vs C++ performance test.
* 1118Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-212-4/+2
|
* 1117 - redo entire tanglerKartik K. Agaram2015-04-214-260/+284
| | | | | | | | | | Instead of adding a third-level hack for the new bug (failing test) with multiple directives, I'm giving up on deducing #line directives directly. Instead I'm going to maintain the file and line for every single line as I read it, and then emit directives on their basis as a post-processing step. This way tangling itself can remain oblivious to line numbers, even if we're passing objects around rather than naked strings.
* 1116 - simpler memory checksKartik K. Agaram2015-04-205-55/+85
|
* 1115 - another pass at names: console and displayKartik K. Agaram2015-04-202-8/+12
| | | | (Follow-up to 544.)
* 1114 - more primitives for managing the cursorKartik K. Agaram2015-04-202-0/+78
|
* 1113Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-202-4/+4
|
* 1112Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-202-4/+4
|
* 1111 - start adding ncurses primitivesKartik K. Agaram2015-04-203-1/+40
|
* 1110 - 'scenarios' directive applies only to current fileKartik K. Agaram2015-04-207-7/+5
|
* 1109 - interpolate stringsKartik K. Agaram2015-04-204-0/+2235
|
* 1108 - check for typos in memory expectations in scenariosKartik K. Agaram2015-04-202-0/+20
|
* 1107Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-202-1/+49
|
* 1106Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-201-1/+1
|
* 1105 - more primitives for managing ingredientsKartik K. Agaram2015-04-1933-50/+164
|
* 1104 - support 'dump' in mu scenariosKartik K. Agaram2015-04-191-4/+7
|
* 1103Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-192-0/+32
|
* 1102Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-192-0/+23
|
* 1101Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-1917-56/+57
|
* 1100Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-192-0/+829
|
* 1099 - new recipe: convert integer to decimal stringKartik K. Agaram2015-04-1810-14/+1292
|
* vim highlighting for labelsKartik K. Agaram2015-04-181-1/+2
|
* 1097 - 'grow-buffer' works the first time!Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-182-0/+372
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | I thought I'd need to duplicate scenarios to simulate running some code, making some checks, running some more code. But I can just keep saving state to raw locations! I'd still have to manage raw locations myself, though. And it can be ping-pongy to have to check on the other blocks then go back to the run block. But what's the alternative? Multiple run blocks (even excluding the implementation effort) raise questions of namespace sharing across them. If it gets too bad I can intersperse recipes inside the scenario. Yes, that will work. Of course, overly long tests might themselves be a bad idea. We'll see, this is all terra incognita syntactically speaking. This might not be enough to check that a routine is waiting on a channel, but should keep us until then. Wait, even there what you need is a way to check on the status of your child routines. Yeah, doable. Even if we're getting ahead of ourselves.
* 1096Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-185-5/+5
|
* 1095Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-181-0/+1
|
* 1094 - demarcate sections in layersKartik K. Agaram2015-04-1712-27/+46
| | | | | | We have tangled vs regular comments, but they highlight the same. So we're still at 3 colors for comments. Anything more starts to seem gratuitous.
* 1093 - little more vim support for the old arc versionKartik K. Agaram2015-04-172-0/+10
|
* 1092 - vim: auto-insert tangle comments like regular onesKartik K. Agaram2015-04-171-0/+3
|
* 1091Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-172-18/+17
|
* 1090Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-179-20/+684
|
* 1089Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-172-0/+71
|
* 1088 - start porting the 'buffer' typeKartik K. Agaram2015-04-175-1/+230
|
* 1087 - mu files can now define containers and exclusive containersKartik K. Agaram2015-04-174-1/+102
|
* 1086 - support variant names in 'maybe-convert'Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-172-3/+63
|
* 1085 - to access variants of sum types use 'maybe-convert'Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-174-1/+111
|
* 1084Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-1730-51/+56
|
* 1083 - start of a sum type for muKartik K. Agaram2015-04-173-0/+89
|
* 1082Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-173-11/+10
| | | | | Turns out I'm only able to define a 'raise' macro because I have include no system headers after that point.
* 1081Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-171-1/+1
|
* 1080Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-171-1/+1
|
* 1079Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-171-0/+1
|
* 1078 - better line numbersKartik K. Agaram2015-04-173-1/+25
| | | | Skip tangle comments inside tangle rather than in the makefile.
* 1077Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-1721-16/+49
|
generated by cgit-pink 1.4.1-2-gfad0 (git 2.36.2.497.gbbea4dcf42) at 2024-07-02 20:25:49 +0000