World: r4wp
[#Red] Red language group
older newer | first last |
Kaj 12-Mar-2013 [6282x2] | I'm just reporting crashes that I observe |
Is there any point to continuing testing at the moment? I'm not sure now what reports you want | |
DocKimbel 12-Mar-2013 [6284] | My point is: an undefined word error is a user error, and exiting the interpreter with an error message is currently the best thing to do. I've removed the exit points after such errors because you've asked me to for making your demos run without exiting. But I shouldn't have done that. |
Kaj 12-Mar-2013 [6285] | I don't really understand. The interpreter never halted on undefined words, only undefined paths |
DocKimbel 12-Mar-2013 [6286x2] | Same thing. |
Paths error out because there's an undefined word in them. | |
Kaj 12-Mar-2013 [6288] | I know, but you didn't remove a HALT from word evaluation because I asked |
DocKimbel 12-Mar-2013 [6289x4] | Well, actually, I did. :) |
But I will them all back, user errors should make the app exit, currently it's the best way. | |
That's why I told you before to validate the user input in order to avoid errors as much as possible. | |
(Until we can catch them properly with TRY) | |
Kaj 12-Mar-2013 [6293] | I don't remember you saying that, but I'm looking into it |
DocKimbel 12-Mar-2013 [6294] | But it seems we misunderstood each other. :) |
Kaj 12-Mar-2013 [6295] | Obviously |
DocKimbel 12-Mar-2013 [6296] | See my post on Sun 23:49 |
Kaj 12-Mar-2013 [6297] | Oh, I see, you were going to implement VALUE? for validation. I just didn't think you meant checking the entire input; I thought you were talking about the result |
DocKimbel 12-Mar-2013 [6298x2] | I meant the whole user input, mainly for catching undefined words/paths and hanlding the error out of DO. |
Maybe I will do it myself in the console script... | |
Kaj 12-Mar-2013 [6300x8] | Thinking about it, that would reject any user code that uses words as symbols, wouldn't it? |
I have a loop written that does the evaluation, even without VALUE? but it doesn't seem like a good idea to me | |
red>> x: load "view button" forall x [print unset? get x/1] false true | |
Undefined single words were never a problem in the interpreter before. That's why I could write Redpages with a header: | |
Red [] | |
They were simply ignored. After I requested the warning message, the Red word produces such a warning, so for now I write: | |
'Red [] | |
By the way, are get-paths supposed to work? | |
DocKimbel 12-Mar-2013 [6308x3] | Nope, not yet. |
DO doesn't support a Red header yet. | |
You should strip it from a LOADed block before passing it to DO. | |
Kaj 12-Mar-2013 [6311] | I know, but it worked |
DocKimbel 12-Mar-2013 [6312x3] | I need to fix some interpreter issues revealed by Peter's port of ~2500 tests to the interpreter. There's about a dozen failing tests to fix. |
Once that done, I will have a look again at those error reporting issues. | |
I agree that it is not yet possible to deeply validate user input. I'll see if I can find a cheap workaround for the release. | |
Kaj 12-Mar-2013 [6315] | OK, thanks |
DocKimbel 12-Mar-2013 [6316] | 7 failing tests to go until complete equivalence between Red compiler and interpreter. :-) |
GrahamC 12-Mar-2013 [6317] | nice progress |
Bo 12-Mar-2013 [6318] | Great! |
Maarten 13-Mar-2013 [6319] | Nice! |
Kaj 13-Mar-2013 [6320x12] | I'm getting a weird crash if I load the following in the GTK-browser: |
function [] [ [text] ] | |
bash-4.0# ./GTK-browser test.red *** Runtime Error 1: access violation *** at: 08063687h | |
It doesn't happen if I load it in the console | |
This fixes it: | |
function [] [ text: "" [text] ] | |
But this doesn't: | |
function [] [ text: none [text] ] | |
Actually, it crashes by just loading: | |
none | |
Sorry, strike that last one | |
I've put it in the tracker | |
older newer | first last |