about summary refs log tree commit diff stats
path: root/cpp/.traces
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAgeFilesLines
* 1197Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-251-0/+44
|
* 1196Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-241-0/+0
|
* 1195Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-241-0/+20
|
* 1194Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-24102-0/+104
|
* 1193Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-2415-65/+65
|
* 1192Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-241-5/+5
|
* 1187Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-241-0/+37
|
* 1184 - finally, concurrencyKartik K. Agaram2015-04-24117-52/+175
|
* 1168Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-2413-75/+75
|
* 1166Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-249-23/+23
| | | | | | | Why did I think STL's map wasn't efficient? It has logarithmic complexity (maintains a tree internally) and is faster than hashing for small containers. It's the more portable solution and should be what I turn to by default.
* 1163Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-242-2/+2
|
* 1146 - yet another out-of-bounds accessKartik K. Agaram2015-04-221-0/+40
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | There's a test in this commit, but it doesn't actually fail, because by some accident the memory at index 2 of recipe 'f' has data at the is_label offset and breaks out of the loop. Graah. How did I ever misplace that "Reading One Instruction" waypoint? I could swear I was concerned about this possibility when I implemented calls. Today has been tough on my confidence. STL helps avoid memory leaks but doesn't help with buffer overflows nearly as much as I thought. Oh brilliant, valgrind caught the problem! And there weren't any others. I feel much better.
* 1126 - 'mu test x.mu' runs just scenarios in x.muKartik K. Agaram2015-04-221-0/+210
| | | | | | | 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. Agaram2015-04-221-26/+26
|
* 1116 - simpler memory checksKartik K. Agaram2015-04-201-0/+29
|
* 1109 - interpolate stringsKartik K. Agaram2015-04-203-0/+2078
|
* 1108 - check for typos in memory expectations in scenariosKartik K. Agaram2015-04-201-0/+5
|
* 1107Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-201-0/+3
|
* 1105 - more primitives for managing ingredientsKartik K. Agaram2015-04-1932-50/+99
|
* 1103Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-191-0/+11
|
* 1101Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-1913-22/+22
|
* 1100Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-191-0/+759
|
* 1099 - new recipe: convert integer to decimal stringKartik K. Agaram2015-04-187-4/+1189
|
* 1097 - 'grow-buffer' works the first time!Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-181-0/+355
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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.
* 1090Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-174-11/+537
|
* 1089Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-171-0/+51
|
* 1088 - start porting the 'buffer' typeKartik K. Agaram2015-04-171-0/+204
|
* 1087 - mu files can now define containers and exclusive containersKartik K. Agaram2015-04-172-0/+10
|
* 1086 - support variant names in 'maybe-convert'Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-171-0/+32
|
* 1085 - to access variants of sum types use 'maybe-convert'Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-172-0/+62
|
* 1084Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-1729-51/+51
|
* 1083 - start of a sum type for muKartik K. Agaram2015-04-171-0/+34
|
* 1075Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-1743-145/+130
|
* 1074Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-1730-52/+52
|
* 1069 - rename record/field to container/elementKartik K. Agaram2015-04-165-2/+2
| | | | | | | | | This seems more obvious to laypeople. I've also come up with a design for sum types: I'm going to call them exclusive containers. You call 'get' on containers, 'index' on arrays, and 'maybe-convert' on exclusive containers (as well as tagged types, but that's even later).
* 1066 - bugfix: support string literals with colonsKartik K. Agaram2015-04-151-0/+8
|
* 1063 - variable names for surrounding spaces now workKartik K. Agaram2015-04-1410-1/+137
| | | | This was a pain to debug.
* 1061Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-141-0/+14
|
* 1058 - scenarios can now check traceKartik K. Agaram2015-04-123-0/+29
|
* 1054Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-121-0/+11
|
* 1050Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-115-108/+124
|
* 1046 - mu programs can now add to the traceKartik K. Agaram2015-04-091-0/+7
| | | | Still just raw strings, but interpolation is coming.
* 1045Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-0923-38/+38
|
* 1042 - start saving traces in mu scenariosKartik K. Agaram2015-04-085-0/+791
|
* 1030 - better test isolation for break/loopKartik K. Agaram2015-04-0720-26/+26
| | | | | | | I've been resetting all recipes after every single test, but the arc version has shown that this gets slow all too quickly. And the longer I wait to fix it the harder it gets to fix. Already, boy, were this and the next couple of commits hard to track down.
* 1017Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-041-0/+11
|
* 1013Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-0321-35/+35
|
* 1010Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-035-7/+57
|
* 1009Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-031-0/+37
|
* 1007Kartik K. Agaram2015-04-035-8/+5
|
generated by cgit-pink 1.4.1-2-gfad0 (git 2.36.2.497.gbbea4dcf42) at 2024-11-07 07:43:27 +0000