Menu
▾
▴
gobo-eiffel-develop
|
From: Jocelyn <li...@dj...> - 2009-01-23 10:07:15
|
The feature KI_BUFFER.item has a comment which seems quite obsolete.
item (i: INTEGER): G is
-- Item at position `i'
require
i_large_enough: i >= 1
i_small_enough: i <= count
do
-- TODO: This routine should be deferred, but there is
-- a bug with ISE Eiffel 5.1.5 and 5.2 in the generated
-- C code in finalized mode, and having this
-- routine effective is a workaround.
end
I think, it is now safe to remove this TODO comment, and make this
feature deferred
especially since the very old ISE Eiffel 5.1 and 5.2 are not supported
anymore in Gobo's code
Regards,
-- Jocelyn
|
|
From: Eric B. <er...@go...> - 2009-01-23 11:13:51
|
Jocelyn wrote: > The feature KI_BUFFER.item has a comment which seems quite obsolete. > > item (i: INTEGER): G is > -- Item at position `i' > require > i_large_enough: i >= 1 > i_small_enough: i <= count > do > -- TODO: This routine should be deferred, but there is > -- a bug with ISE Eiffel 5.1.5 and 5.2 in the generated > -- C code in finalized mode, and having this > -- routine effective is a workaround. > end > > I think, it is now safe to remove this TODO comment, and make this > feature deferred > especially since the very old ISE Eiffel 5.1 and 5.2 are not supported > anymore in Gobo's code But is the bug still "supported" in ISE Eiffel 6.2? ;-) I'll make the change and we'll see. -- Eric Bezault mailto:er...@go... http://www.gobosoft.com |
|
From: Eric B. <er...@go...> - 2009-01-23 20:20:23
|
Eric Bezault wrote: > Jocelyn wrote: >> The feature KI_BUFFER.item has a comment which seems quite obsolete. >> >> item (i: INTEGER): G is >> -- Item at position `i' >> require >> i_large_enough: i >= 1 >> i_small_enough: i <= count >> do >> -- TODO: This routine should be deferred, but there is >> -- a bug with ISE Eiffel 5.1.5 and 5.2 in the generated >> -- C code in finalized mode, and having this >> -- routine effective is a workaround. >> end >> >> I think, it is now safe to remove this TODO comment, and make this >> feature deferred >> especially since the very old ISE Eiffel 5.1 and 5.2 are not supported >> anymore in Gobo's code > > But is the bug still "supported" in ISE Eiffel 6.2? ;-) > I'll make the change and we'll see. The workaround has now been removed both in `item' and `put'. -- Eric Bezault mailto:er...@go... http://www.gobosoft.com |
|
From: Eric B. <er...@go...> - 2009-01-28 13:09:20
|
Eric Bezault wrote: > Eric Bezault wrote: >> Jocelyn wrote: >>> The feature KI_BUFFER.item has a comment which seems quite obsolete. >>> >>> item (i: INTEGER): G is >>> -- Item at position `i' >>> require >>> i_large_enough: i >= 1 >>> i_small_enough: i <= count >>> do >>> -- TODO: This routine should be deferred, but there is >>> -- a bug with ISE Eiffel 5.1.5 and 5.2 in the generated >>> -- C code in finalized mode, and having this >>> -- routine effective is a workaround. >>> end >>> >>> I think, it is now safe to remove this TODO comment, and make this >>> feature deferred >>> especially since the very old ISE Eiffel 5.1 and 5.2 are not supported >>> anymore in Gobo's code >> But is the bug still "supported" in ISE Eiffel 6.2? ;-) >> I'll make the change and we'll see. > > The workaround has now been removed both in `item' and `put'. Bad move. I had to learn the hard way that the bug is still there in EiffelStudio 6.2 (and I didn't check for earlier versions): some of my colleagues at work complained that the generated C code of their finalized applications did not compile anymore after I made the change. -- Eric Bezault mailto:er...@go... http://www.gobosoft.com |
|
From: Emmanuel S. [ES] <ma...@ei...> - 2009-01-28 19:17:12
|
Can you send me some details on the failure? I tried on our code and I don't have any trouble when I make them deferred. Note that making them deferred forced me to change KI_CHARACTER_BUFFER to remove the undefinition of `put' and `item'. Manu > -----Original Message----- > From: Eric Bezault [mailto:er...@go...] > Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 5:09 AM > To: Jocelyn > Cc: gobodev > Subject: Re: [gobo-eiffel-develop] [review] comment and expected deferred > status of KI_BUFFER.item > > Eric Bezault wrote: > > Eric Bezault wrote: > >> Jocelyn wrote: > >>> The feature KI_BUFFER.item has a comment which seems quite obsolete. > >>> > >>> item (i: INTEGER): G is > >>> -- Item at position `i' > >>> require > >>> i_large_enough: i >= 1 > >>> i_small_enough: i <= count > >>> do > >>> -- TODO: This routine should be deferred, but there > is > >>> -- a bug with ISE Eiffel 5.1.5 and 5.2 in the > generated > >>> -- C code in finalized mode, and having this > >>> -- routine effective is a workaround. > >>> end > >>> > >>> I think, it is now safe to remove this TODO comment, and make this > >>> feature deferred > >>> especially since the very old ISE Eiffel 5.1 and 5.2 are not > supported > >>> anymore in Gobo's code > >> But is the bug still "supported" in ISE Eiffel 6.2? ;-) > >> I'll make the change and we'll see. > > > > The workaround has now been removed both in `item' and `put'. > > Bad move. I had to learn the hard way that the bug is still there in > EiffelStudio 6.2 (and I didn't check for earlier versions): some of > my colleagues at work complained that the generated C code of their > finalized applications did not compile anymore after I made the change. > > -- > Eric Bezault > mailto:er...@go... > http://www.gobosoft.com > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ----- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: > SourcForge Community > SourceForge wants to tell your story. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword > _______________________________________________ > gobo-eiffel-develop mailing list > gob...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gobo-eiffel-develop |
|
From: Eric B. <er...@go...> - 2009-01-29 09:42:26
|
Emmanuel Stapf [ES] wrote: > Can you send me some details on the failure? I already spent 2 hours yesterday to try to reproduce it on a small example to no avail. > I tried on our code and I don't have > any trouble when I make them deferred. Note that making them deferred forced me to > change KI_CHARACTER_BUFFER to remove the undefinition of `put' and `item'. Yes, that's what I had done. -- Eric Bezault mailto:er...@go... http://www.gobosoft.com |
|
From: Emmanuel S. [ES] <ma...@ei...> - 2009-01-29 16:41:47
|
> I already spent 2 hours yesterday to try to reproduce it on a small > example to no avail. Can you ask whoever had the problem to contact me and I'll try to shadow him? Thanks, Manu |
|
From: Eric B. <er...@go...> - 2009-01-29 17:00:17
|
Emmanuel Stapf [ES] wrote: >> I already spent 2 hours yesterday to try to reproduce it on a small >> example to no avail. > > Can you ask whoever had the problem to contact me and I'll try to shadow him? Too late: we rolled back the modification as soon as we noticed the problem. In the meantime, even though I didn't manage to reproduce the problem I know why: it depends on whether two C header files happened to be grouped in the same Big C file or not. But even when they are not, the problem is there, even though the C compiler does not complain. I'll submit a detailed bug report next week when I'll be back from vacation. -- Eric Bezault mailto:er...@go... http://www.gobosoft.com |
|
From: Eric B. <er...@go...> - 2009-02-09 18:40:14
|
Eric Bezault wrote: > Emmanuel Stapf [ES] wrote: >>> I already spent 2 hours yesterday to try to reproduce it on a small >>> example to no avail. >> >> Can you ask whoever had the problem to contact me and I'll try to >> shadow him? > > Too late: we rolled back the modification as soon as we noticed > the problem. > > In the meantime, even though I didn't manage to reproduce the problem > I know why: it depends on whether two C header files happened to be > grouped in the same Big C file or not. But even when they are not, > the problem is there, even though the C compiler does not complain. > > I'll submit a detailed bug report next week when I'll be back from > vacation. I reported it in support.eiffel.com: [Compiler #15375]. -- Eric Bezault mailto:er...@go... http://www.gobosoft.com |
×
Want the latest updates on software, tech news, and AI?
Get latest updates about software, tech news, and AI from SourceForge directly in your inbox once a month.
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X