World: r3wp
[Red] Red language group
older newer | first last |
Kaj 19-May-2011 [1438] | If and when that happens, I'll update my programs to be compliant, as I'm doing now |
BrianH 19-May-2011 [1439] | Well, it can't become strictly strongly typed, as a certain amount of type breakage is the whole point of its existence. You can't be strictly strongly typed if you have typecasting, pointer arithmetic, literal pointer values, or the ability to call C code. Red/System is supposed to be strongly typed with those rule breakers, in order to shield Red itself from those features. |
Kaj 19-May-2011 [1440x15] | Ehm, yes, that's what I've been saying all the time |
Doc, defining handle! with alias doesn't work: | |
*** Compilation Error: invalid struct syntax: [handle!] *** in: %/users/administrator/Red/Red-ZeroMQ-binding/examples/../ZeroMQ-binding.reds *** at: [struct [ content [handle!] | |
#define doesn't work, either: | |
** Script Error: Cannot use path on none! value ** Where: check-arguments-type ** Near: if all [ not empty? spec: entry/2/4 block? spec/1 ] [ spec: next spec ] foreach | |
You wanted to know if the appointed error locations are correct. That seems to be alright, and the error for a struct is nicely descriptive, but an error for a function definition is rather unspecific: | |
*** Compilation Error: invalid definition for function send: [ socket [pointer!] data [pointer!] size [integer!] flags [integer!] return: [logic!] ] *** in: %/users/administrator/Red/Red-ZeroMQ-binding/examples/../ZeroMQ-binding.reds *** at: [func [ socket [pointer!] | |
Oh wait. I have to use a block for #define, and then it works. But not ALIAS | |
And the error output for a function starts at the offending parameter, so that's actually pretty good, but it's not obvious | |
Here's a message that's not very clear: | |
*** Compilation Error: type mismatch *** expected: [pointer!] , found: [integer!] *** in: %/users/administrator/Red/Red-ZeroMQ-binding/examples/../ZeroMQ-binding.reds *** at: [0 as-message message data] | |
I can't compare pointers to zero any more. Presumably, these are the arguments to the zero? function, but that information is lost | |
As a nitpick, there's an excess space in the message, before the comma | |
It seems that NULL is defined as integer! 0 | |
So it seems that there is no way anymore to pass a null pointer to a function or to compare a pointer to null | |
Andreas 19-May-2011 [1455x2] | null-p: as [pointer! [integer!]] 0 |
does that work? | |
Kaj 19-May-2011 [1457x2] | I tried AS POINTER! |
The only syntax I can get to compile is as pointer! [integer!] 0 | |
Andreas 19-May-2011 [1459x2] | null-ptr: pointer [integer!] null-ptr/value: 0 should probably work as well |
but `as pointer! [integer!] 0` is fine, if it works. the spec needs a fix so that the examples match the syntax spec, though. | |
Kaj 19-May-2011 [1461] | Wouldn't that set the pointed to integer? |
Andreas 19-May-2011 [1462] | indeed, sorry for the confusion |
Kaj 19-May-2011 [1463x2] | Are imports type checked yet? |
I can't get past the null comparisons, but I've checked my other fixes in to Fossil | |
Dockimbel 20-May-2011 [1465x2] | Are imports type checked yet? Yes (but untested yet). |
Thanks for all your feedback, it is really helpful. I will review every issue you've raised today. | |
Kaj 20-May-2011 [1467] | Thanks. The 0MQ binding is a nice test case |
Dockimbel 20-May-2011 [1468x7] | I was a bit confused yesterday about ALIAS usage, due to this ticket: https://github.com/dockimbel/Red/issues/39.I jumped on fixing it too fast without first checking the specification, so I mistakenly extended ALIAS beyond its original purpose (which is just for aliasing struct! declarations, as described in section 4.5.5 of the specification). |
I just pushed a new commit that reverts back some of the changes I did for aliased types yesterday, and fixes the compiler errors reported by Kaj. | |
I have uploaded a patched version of the 0MQ binding here: http://static.red-lang.org/tmp/red-0mq-fixes.zip | |
Among the changes, 'null is now a global variable defined as a null pointer. | |
So, #define is the way to go to rename existing types and ALIAS is reserved for struct! only (it allows to circular references that couldn't be done using macros). | |
Kaj: "If Red/System truely is to be strongly typed, there needs to be more than just pointer! [integer!]. The issue I'm currently having is exactly that there is no matching declaration for what I need" Could you tell me what is your need precisely? | |
it allows to circular references => it allows circular references | |
Kaj 20-May-2011 [1475] | I need a pointer to a struct of which only 0MQ knows the structure. So any pointer will do, unless you want to make Red/System strongly typed |
shadwolf 20-May-2011 [1476x4] | dockIbel one cool thing thqt could help promoting RED would be to do a openSUZE minimal distro using their tool that gives a linux ready to use out of the box with all needed to code or enhance red |
I know it zas made for Illumination software creator and was a good enightenment for it | |
plus ISC opensuze distro was custom distro of the year which spread even more the word | |
could be a good way in a middle term to have tools + OS etc in a single CD | |
Kaj 21-May-2011 [1480] | No need, it already exists |
Dockimbel 21-May-2011 [1481x2] | You're right, I should add a mention about it on red-lang.org. |
Kaj: I pushed a few fixes and changes on ALIAS support, it now behaves strictly as described in the specification. For the 0MQ binding, you need to replace [struct! message!] occurences with [message!] to make it compilable with the new version. | |
Kaj 21-May-2011 [1483] | Including your previous changes, I figure? |
Dockimbel 21-May-2011 [1484] | Yes. |
Kaj 21-May-2011 [1485x2] | Processed your changes, and indeed it builds again |
Have a new batch of issues, but will research more first | |
Kaj 22-May-2011 [1487] | In the spec in 4.5.5, shouldn't the child structs gift/first and gift/second be created individually (and assigned to the struct pointers in gift) before their members can be assigned? |
older newer | first last |