about summary refs log tree commit diff stats
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAgeFilesLines
* 2255 - bug in detecting non-integersKartik K. Agaram2015-10-061-1/+8
| | | | Thanks Caleb Couch.
* 2254Kartik K. Agaram2015-10-052-34/+34
|
* 2253 - start reorganizing tracesKartik K. Agaram2015-10-052-34/+1
|
* 2252Kartik K. Agaram2015-10-051-1/+1
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | I can't easily use generic containers without needing some syntax for generic recipes: push:number a:number, l:list:number which would be implemented as: T <- next-type a:T <- next-ingredient etc. Another concern: how to represent map<string, list<number>>? map::address:array:character::list:number where the '::' is just silently turned into ':'. Agh, all this is so baroque. All this while I've been trying to avoid getting into language design. All I want is some lightweight way to avoid security holes and memory corruption. But now it seems like I need facets to control compile-time activities and so on.
* 2251Kartik K. Agaram2015-10-051-1/+17
| | | | | | Unbelievable that this hitherto-unanticipated test passed so easily. Even though I'm simply bolting on special cases in an ad hoc manner, this isn't too shabby.
* 2250Kartik K. Agaram2015-10-051-3/+48
|
* 2249 - start of type ingredients or genericsKartik K. Agaram2015-10-051-10/+79
| | | | | *Extremely* ugly. I need to use better variable names around new waypoints.
* 2248Kartik K. Agaram2015-10-051-9/+6
|
* 2247 - type-check products of non-primitive recipesKartik K. Agaram2015-10-0512-91/+114
| | | | | | | | We still can't check ingredient types, and even this is still a run-time check. We'll need to start tracking recipe signatures at some point. I've had to introduce a hack called /skiptypecheck. Time to get generics working.
* 2246Kartik K. Agaram2015-10-051-1/+1
|
* 2245Kartik K. Agaram2015-10-051-4/+1
|
* 2244Kartik K. Agaram2015-10-052-9/+9
|
* 2243Kartik K. Agaram2015-10-052-1/+3
|
* 2242Kartik K. Agaram2015-10-052-3/+54
|
* 2241 - back to type-checking get-addressKartik K. Agaram2015-10-055-10/+32
| | | | | Now duplex-list is fully non-generic and only works with characters. But we'll fix that in a bit..
* 2240 - drop the failing test in 'mu sandbox'Kartik K. Agaram2015-10-041-45/+1
| | | | | | With our new type checks it's no longer possible to expand traces generated directly in the sandbox. So now there's yet another test that we can't run in the sandbox/ app. Yet.
* 2239Kartik K. Agaram2015-10-041-1/+5
|
* 2238 - dump recipes after tanglingKartik K. Agaram2015-10-042-0/+10
|
* 2237Kartik K. Agaram2015-10-042-2/+2
|
* 2236 - all tests passing except one in 'mu sandbox'Kartik K. Agaram2015-10-042-15/+17
|
* 2235Kartik K. Agaram2015-10-021-4/+4
|
* 2234 - check type of get's productKartik K. Agaram2015-10-024-20/+53
| | | | Already I'm finding type errors in the programming environment.
* 2233 - basic checks for non-primitive recipesKartik K. Agaram2015-10-012-8/+14
| | | | This came last because we had to ensure all primitives are covered.
* 2232Kartik K. Agaram2015-10-0116-129/+435
|
* 2231Kartik K. Agaram2015-10-011-0/+1
|
* 2230Kartik K. Agaram2015-10-011-11/+17
|
* 2229Kartik K. Agaram2015-10-011-0/+6
|
* 2228 - index-checking for arraysKartik K. Agaram2015-10-011-23/+47
|
* 2227 - offset-checking for containersKartik K. Agaram2015-10-014-42/+88
|
* 2226 - standardize warning formatKartik K. Agaram2015-10-0133-175/+186
| | | | | | | | 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?
* 2225Kartik K. Agaram2015-10-014-63/+91
|
* 2224Kartik K. Agaram2015-09-301-3/+3
|
* 2223Kartik K. Agaram2015-09-302-20/+32
|
* 2222Kartik K. Agaram2015-09-303-14/+14
|
* 2221Kartik K. Agaram2015-09-304-19/+46
|
* 2220Kartik K. Agaram2015-09-303-34/+121
|
* 2219Kartik K. Agaram2015-09-301-12/+4
|
* 2218 - check types in instructions much earlierKartik K. Agaram2015-09-3013-132/+177
| | | | | | | | | Front-loads it a bit more than I'd like, but the payoff is that other recipes will now be able to describe the type checks right next to their operation. I'm also introducing a new use of /raw with literals to indicate unsafe typecasts.
* 2217Kartik K. Agaram2015-09-292-0/+0
|
* 2216Kartik K. Agaram2015-09-292-1/+13
|
* 2215Kartik K. Agaram2015-09-291-1/+1
|
* 2214Kartik K. Agaram2015-09-288-33/+39
|
* 2213 - start moving type checks out of 'run'Kartik K. Agaram2015-09-284-43/+88
| | | | | That way we only have to check each static instruction once, rather than every time it runs.
* 2212Kartik K. Agaram2015-09-281-6/+6
|
* 2211Kartik K. Agaram2015-09-281-0/+0
|
* 2209Kartik K. Agaram2015-09-261-4/+4
|
* 2208Kartik K. Agaram2015-09-261-0/+5
|
* 2207Kartik K. Agaram2015-09-261-1/+1
|
* 2206 - fix missing ingredientsKartik K. Agaram2015-09-263-5/+5
| | | | | How the heck was this working until now? There must be redundant moves. And was I clobbering test data?
* 2205 - warn on missing ingredientKartik K. Agaram2015-09-182-1/+13
| | | | ..unless you explicitly ignore the found? result.
generated by cgit-pink 1.4.1-2-gfad0 (git 2.36.2.497.gbbea4dcf42) at 2024-11-24 02:47:01 +0000