about summary refs log tree commit diff stats
path: root/edit
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAgeFilesLines
* 2853 - purge get-address from edit/ appKartik K. Agaram2016-04-2211-470/+563
| | | | Phew!
* 2852Kartik K. Agaram2016-04-211-1/+2
|
* 2851Kartik K. Agaram2016-04-211-109/+109
|
* 2830 - bring back deleted test from 2829Kartik K. Agaram2016-04-101-2/+0
| | | | Issue 1 in 2829 is now fixed.
* 2806 - bugfix: cleaning up in 'reload'Kartik K. Agaram2016-03-211-1/+1
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | This brings back some of the complexity I thought I'd gotten rid of in 2799. The regression brought home the point that I'd forgotten to write tests for those bits. Written now. It also brought home the point that our cleanup in 'reload' has always been hacky and incomplete. It's also ugly that those tests in the sandbox/ and edit/ apps need changing (particularly when the test is about how the output doesn't change).
* 2782 - directly use string literals everywhereKartik K. Agaram2016-03-144-20/+10
|
* 2777 - pass literal strings into functionsKartik K. Agaram2016-03-131-9/+10
|
* 2735 - define recipes using 'def'Kartik K. Agaram2016-03-0811-170/+170
| | | | | | | | | | | | I'm dropping all mention of 'recipe' terminology from the Readme. That way I hope to avoid further bike-shedding discussions while I very slowly decide on the right terminology with my students. I could be smarter in my error messages and use 'recipe' when code uses it and 'function' otherwise. But what about other words like ingredient? It would all add complexity that I'm not yet sure is worthwhile. But I do want separate experiences for veteran programmers reading about Mu on github and for people learning programming using Mu.
* 2716 - more holes in immutability checksKartik K. Agaram2016-02-262-4/+4
| | | | | We're still not done. Layer 60 doesn't yet handle variables in surrounding spaces. There's probably other issues..
* 2707Kartik K. Agaram2016-02-253-14/+0
|
* 2705 - eradicate 'warning' from appsKartik K. Agaram2016-02-251-49/+49
|
* 2661 - warn if a reply doesn't match recipe headerKartik K. Agaram2016-02-151-1/+2
| | | | | | | | Thanks Nicolas Léveillé for running up against this bug: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11094837 (Also noticed and fixed several subsidiary issues. This whole aspect doesn't seem fully baked yet.)
* 2624Kartik K. Agaram2016-02-012-15/+23
| | | | Reorganize further to make edit/008-sandbox-test more self-contained.
* 2623 - bugfix: editing sandboxesKartik K. Agaram2016-02-013-5/+15
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | If you restore 2 sandboxes, the first render was setting response-starting-row-on-screen on both, without ever rendering a response. If the lower sandbox contained a print and rendered the screen instead of the response, the original response-starting-row-on-screen was never reset. If the process of running the sandboxes caused the lower sandbox's title bar to move below the now-stale response-starting-row-on-screen[1], editing the lower sandbox no longer works. [1] (Either because the upper sandbox prints to screen as well (causing the first F4 to move the lower sandbox down by several lines), or because a fresh sandbox is created with several lines before the first F4 is hit.) Current solution: never set response-starting-row-on-screen during reload (or otherwise when there's no response). This is hard to test right now because 'restore' is not a tested interface, and I can't come up with another situation where the response-starting-row-on-screen goes stale. So I'm now trying to keep all changes to response-starting-row-on-screen close together. Another idea is to add a check that the click row lies below the response-starting row *and* above the start of the next sandbox. (But what if there's no next sandbox?) (This bug is really a regression, introduced last Sep in 2163.)
* 2622 - bugfix: left-arrowKartik K. Agaram2016-01-311-3/+78
| | | | Moving back to wrapped line was overflowing the right margin.
* 2610 - warn when recipes don't use default-spaceKartik K. Agaram2016-01-272-9/+19
| | | | Somehow this never transferred over from the Arc version until now.
* 2608 - fix-up tests in sandbox/ appKartik K. Agaram2016-01-274-39/+16
| | | | | | | | | | When I first forked it from the edit/ app, I wasn't sure how to deal with changing the recipe side when the only way the program accesses it is with the untestable 'restore' hack. Now we introduce a little hook into event-loop and pass in any updated recipe side directly. In the process I've cleaned up several minor stylistic inconsistencies between edit/ and sandbox/ apps.
* 2604 - clearing line was sometimes hiding cursorKartik K. Agaram2016-01-251-1/+1
| | | | Caused by 2591.
* 2602Kartik K. Agaram2016-01-241-1/+1
|
* 2598 - bugfix: scrolling after editKartik K. Agaram2016-01-231-0/+72
|
* 2595 - bugfix: update state when restoring sandboxesKartik K. Agaram2016-01-231-0/+3
|
* 2594 - bugfixes: managing state when deletingKartik K. Agaram2016-01-233-93/+306
| | | | This required completely redesigning scrolling.
* 2593 - bugfix: editing a sandbox resets scrollKartik K. Agaram2016-01-221-0/+54
|
* 2592 - bugfix: sandbox title bar managementKartik K. Agaram2016-01-221-1/+85
|
* 2591Kartik K. Agaram2016-01-221-1/+7
|
* 2590 - support scrolling through sandboxesKartik K. Agaram2016-01-227-13/+387
|
* 2589 - tweak color for sandbox labelsKartik K. Agaram2016-01-221-2/+2
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | I'm now thinking about how to support scrolling on the sandbox side. Caleb's idea is to use down-arrow inside the sandbox editor, and then "scroll off" the editor to the top of each successive sandbox. I think I'll reserve the white background as the cursor color in that situation. I wonder if I should just undo all the support for sandbox labels since yesterday. Labels are perhaps superfluous once I support scrolling and reorder sandboxes to always throw ones with errors up top. But then you can end up scrolling through lots of tests without any sense of how far down you are. So the other approach is to keep labels and try to keep them stable, not reorder them. Looking further ahead I'm going to need a way to jump to a specific sandbox. Maybe instead of reordering sandboxes I should just automatically render from the first sandbox with error. Maybe show the number of failed sandboxes in the status instead of the index of the first failure.
* 2588 - bugfix: show *first* sandbox with errorKartik K. Agaram2016-01-221-1/+55
|
* 2587 - bugfix: show-screen on warningsKartik K. Agaram2016-01-221-1/+0
| | | | See `cannot_write_tests_for`.
* 2586 - show first sandbox with error in statusKartik K. Agaram2016-01-224-17/+69
|
* 2585 - label sandboxes with a numberKartik K. Agaram2016-01-226-29/+38
| | | | | | | | | It also seems useful that the number maps to the name of the file the sandbox is saved in. However this mapping is currently a happy accident and not actually tested. I'm starting to switch gears and help make the editor useable with many many sandboxes. This is just the first step of several.
* 2580 - check product type of 'maybe-convert'Kartik K. Agaram2016-01-201-10/+10
| | | | I had to undo some over-zealous changes in 2576.
* 2576 - distinguish allocated addresses from othersKartik K. Agaram2016-01-1911-1257/+1257
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | This is the one major refinement on the C programming model I'm planning to introduce in mu. Instead of Rust's menagerie of pointer types and static checking, I want to introduce just one new type, and use it to perform ref-counting at runtime. So far all we're doing is updating new's interface. The actual ref-counting implementation is next. One implication: I might sometimes need duplicate implementations for a recipe with allocated vs vanilla addresses of the same type. So far it seems I can get away with just always passing in allocated addresses; the situations when you want to pass an unallocated address to a recipe should be few and far between.
* 2558Kartik K. Agaram2016-01-121-2/+5
|
* 2548 - teach 'print' to print integersKartik K. Agaram2015-12-286-21/+38
| | | | | | | | | | Still can't print non-integer numbers, so this is a bit hacky. The big consequence is that you can't print literal characters anymore because of our rules about how we pick which variant to statically dispatch to. You have to save to a character variable first. Maybe I can add an annotation to literals..
* three bugs fixedKartik K. Agaram2015-12-152-0/+65
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - notes bug in edit/ triggers in immutable but not master branch bug triggered by changes to layer 059: we're finding an unspecialized call to 'length' in 'append_6' hard to debug because trace isn't complete just bring out the big hammer: use a new log file length_2 from recipes.mu is not being deleted (bug #1) so reload doesn't switch length to length_2 when variant_already_exists (bug #2) so we end up saving in Recipe for a primitive ordinal so no valid specialization is found for 'length' (bug #3) why doesn't it trigger in a non-interactive scenario? argh, wasn't checking for an empty line at end. ok, confidence restored.
* rest of edit/ fixedKartik K. Agaram2015-12-154-8/+8
| | | | No more bugs; phew.
* layer 3 of edit/ now workingKartik K. Agaram2015-12-151-6/+8
| | | | | Now I complain before running if a call somewhere doesn't line up with its ingredients, or if no specialization can be made to match it.
* layers 1 and 2 of edit/ now workingKartik K. Agaram2015-12-152-5/+5
|
* 2480Kartik K. Agaram2015-11-271-2/+2
| | | | | | | A long-standing question resolved: why specializations sometimes skipped some names. Turns out cleanup is incomplete if Recipe_ordinal and Recipe aren't exactly lined up with each other, and the early exit in new_variant was breaking that constraint.
* 2477Kartik K. Agaram2015-11-271-2/+2
|
* 2476Kartik K. Agaram2015-11-271-1/+1
|
* 2474 - overload 'copy' and 'equal' for textKartik K. Agaram2015-11-221-1/+1
| | | | 2473 was the final bugfix holding this back.
* 2471Kartik K. Agaram2015-11-221-4/+0
|
* 2468 - overload print-character as just 'print'Kartik K. Agaram2015-11-217-31/+31
|
* 2467 - rename 'string' to 'text' everywhereKartik K. Agaram2015-11-216-24/+24
| | | | | | | | Not entirely happy with this. Maybe we'll find a better name. But at least it's an improvement. One part I *am* happy with is renaming string-replace to replace, string-append to append, etc. Overdue, now that we have static dispatch.
* 2466 - eliminate ':string' from scenariosKartik K. Agaram2015-11-211-1/+1
|
* 2464: edit/: update errors in shape-shifting recipesKartik K. Agaram2015-11-191-0/+49
| | | | | Requires carefully deleting specializations so that they can be reintroduced each time.
* 2460 - headers for remaining recipesKartik K. Agaram2015-11-181-3/+3
|
* 2458 - edit/: recipe side free of sandbox errorsKartik K. Agaram2015-11-181-0/+35
| | | | | | | | | This is happening because of our recent generic changes, which trigger some post-processing transforms on all recipes even if we processed them before. We could clear 'interactive' inside 'reload' to avoid this, but random 'run' blocks in scenarios can still pick up errors from sandboxes earlier in a scenario. The right place to clear the 'interactive' recipe is right after we use it, in run_code_end().
generated by cgit-pink 1.4.1-2-gfad0 (git 2.36.2.497.gbbea4dcf42) at 2024-11-18 22:38:02 +0000