tcl-core — Tcl Core Team discussions about Tcl development

[TCLCORE] Tcl/Tk 8.6.16 Release Candidates

[Donald G P. <don...@ni...>]

Now available at

https://sourceforge.net/projects/tcl/files/Tcl/8.6.16/

are RC0 candidate source code distribution pre-releases of Tcl and Tk 8.6.16.

These are the first candidate releases leading to the release of Tcl/Tk 8.6.16.
Unless some serious blocking issue is reported, it is intended to promote these
candidates to the releases on December 9.

The Tcl pre-release includes pre-releases of the packages Thread 2.8.11, Itcl 4.3.2,
and TDBC* 1.1.10.  The released package sqlite3 3.47.1 is also included.

Please test these candidates on your platforms and reporting any blocking issues
you discover.

Thank you for your contributions and assistance.

-- 
| Don Porter            Applied and Computational Mathematics Division |
| don...@ni...             Information Technology Laboratory |
| http://math.nist.gov/~DPorter/                                  NIST |
|______________________________________________________________________|

Re: [TCLCORE] [CFV] TIP #706: Expose three Tk "In Context" functions via stubs table

[Brian G. <bri...@ea...>]

My vote is
    TIP #706: YES

-Brian

> On Dec 3, 2024, at 22:58, Francois Vogel <fvo...@fr...> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Thanks for your comments on TIP #706. Having heard them, the TIP targets 
> 9.0.1.
> 
> This is the Call For Votes on TIP #706: Expose three Tk "In Context" 
> functions via stubs table
> 
>     https://core.tcl-lang.org/tips/doc/trunk/tip/706.md
> 
> Le the voting period to be just a few days, with closure on Sunday 
> December 8 12:00:00 UTC 2024, that is [clock format 1733659200]
> 
> My vote is:
> 
>     TIP #706: YES
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Francois
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Tcl-Core mailing list
> Tcl...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tcl-core

Re: [TCLCORE] [CFV] TIP #706: Expose three Tk "In Context" functions via stubs table

[Andreas K. <and...@gm...>]

> Hi all,
> 
> Thanks for your comments on TIP #706. Having heard them, the TIP targets 
> 9.0.1.
> 
> This is the Call For Votes on TIP #706: Expose three Tk "In Context" 
> functions via stubs table
> 
>  https://core.tcl-lang.org/tips/doc/trunk/tip/706.md
> 
> Le the voting period to be just a few days, with closure on Sunday 
> December 8 12:00:00 UTC 2024, that is [clock format 1733659200]

TIP #706 YES

-- 
Happy Tcling,
	Andreas Kupries <and...@gm...>
			<https://core.tcl-lang.org/akupries/>
			<https://akupries.tclers.tk/>
	Developer @	SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: [TCLCORE] [CFV] TIP #706: Expose three Tk "In Context" functions via stubs table

[Jan N. <jan...@gm...>]

Op wo 4 dec 2024 om 07:59 schreef Francois Vogel:

> This is the Call For Votes on TIP #706: Expose three Tk "In Context"
> functions via stubs table
>

TIP #706: YES

Regards,
        Jan Nijtmans

Re: [TCLCORE] [CFV] TIP #706: Expose three Tk "In Context" functions via stubs table

[Kevin W. <kw...@co...>]

<div><img width="1" height="1" src='https://fedbdhd.r.tsp1-brevo.net/tr/op/tBGpjZrzrf5UkC-f3aj-qD-QQ5XKo1vLs18-mHJLSpBtBRp6XTQeRgtIVap_ZXZGK4oWczgqmYJ80MTju5OSA_XztLIAb9NN2w7lIjrps7cCo9nbHp-DQNtZ_o6-96lRfbydLhAcz4qHFgYfi37C9hrOxJBaPYb7IVEDoLJ8Q0d5ZAilNFVPF8eOFRZsIclL275XmS4btQw8rLgLqTKq2fb6XNV_' /></div>TIP 706: YES<br/><br/>On 12/4/24 1:58 AM, Francois Vogel wrote:<br/>> Hi all,<br/>><br/>> Thanks for your comments on TIP #706. Having heard them, the TIP <br/>> targets 9.0.1.<br/>><br/>> This is the Call For Votes on TIP #706: Expose three Tk "In Context" <br/>> functions via stubs table<br/>><br/>>     https://core.tcl-lang.org/tips/doc/trunk/tip/706.md<br/>><br/>> Le the voting period to be just a few days, with closure on Sunday <br/>> December 8 12:00:00 UTC 2024, that is [clock format 1733659200]<br/>><br/>> My vote is:<br/>><br/>>     TIP #706: YES<br/>><br/>> Regards,<br/>><br/>> Francois<br/>><br/>><br/>><br/>><br/>> _______________________________________________<br/>> Tcl-Core mailing list<br/>> Tcl...@li...<br/>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tcl-core<br/>

Re: [TCLCORE] [CFV] TIP #706: Expose three Tk "In Context" functions via stubs table

[Rolf A. <tcl...@po...>]

TIP #706: Yes

Francois Vogel <fvo...@pu...> writes:
> Hi all,
>
> Thanks for your comments on TIP #706. Having heard them, the TIP
> targets 9.0.1.
>
> This is the Call For Votes on TIP #706: Expose three Tk "In Context"
> functions via stubs table
>
>     https://core.tcl-lang.org/tips/doc/trunk/tip/706.md
>
> Le the voting period to be just a few days, with closure on Sunday
> December 8 12:00:00 UTC 2024, that is [clock format 1733659200]
>
> My vote is:
>
>     TIP #706: YES
>
> Regards,
>
> Francois
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tcl-Core mailing list
> Tcl...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tcl-core

Re: [TCLCORE] [CFV] TIP #706: Expose three Tk "In Context" functions via stubs table

[Harald O. <har...@el...>]

TIP #706: yes
Thanks Francois, great !
Harald

[TCLCORE] Notes from Mon online meeting re. proposed zipfs changes

[<apn...@ya...>]

For the benefit of those who missed the online meet-up last Monday and had
previously requested an update be posted prior to any decision taking effect
.

 

Certain changes to the zipfs implementation based on Julian's patch
(https://core.tcl-lang.org/tcl/timeline?r=apn-julian-zipfs-patch)  were
discussed. The proposal and rationale are updated in the ticket
https://core.tcl-lang.org/tcl/info/aaa84fbbc59fc039

 

None of these are public features requiring a TIP (and in fact ensures zipfs
info behaviour conforms to the manpage).

 

If no one objects, I'll merge the changes described in the ticket

 

/Ashok

 

 

Re: [TCLCORE] [CFV] TIP #706: Expose three Tk "In Context" functions via stubs table

[Steve L. <st...@di...>]

My vote:

	TIP #706: YES

-- Steve
On 4 Dec 2024 at 2:59 PM +0800, Francois Vogel <fvo...@fr...>, wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Thanks for your comments on TIP #706. Having heard them, the TIP targets
> 9.0.1.
>
> This is the Call For Votes on TIP #706: Expose three Tk "In Context"
> functions via stubs table
>
>     https://core.tcl-lang.org/tips/doc/trunk/tip/706.md
>
> Le the voting period to be just a few days, with closure on Sunday
> December 8 12:00:00 UTC 2024, that is [clock format 1733659200]
>
> My vote is:
>
>     TIP #706: YES
>
> Regards,
>
> Francois
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tcl-Core mailing list
> Tcl...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tcl-core

Re: [TCLCORE] [CFV] TIP #706: Expose three Tk "In Context" functions via stubs table

[<apn...@ya...>]

TIP #706: yes

-----Original Message-----
From: Francois Vogel <fvo...@fr...> 
Sent: Wednesday, December 4, 2024 12:29 PM
To: Tcl Core List <tcl...@li...>
Subject: [TCLCORE] [CFV] TIP #706: Expose three Tk "In Context" functions via stubs table

Hi all,

Thanks for your comments on TIP #706. Having heard them, the TIP targets 
9.0.1.

This is the Call For Votes on TIP #706: Expose three Tk "In Context" 
functions via stubs table

     https://core.tcl-lang.org/tips/doc/trunk/tip/706.md

Le the voting period to be just a few days, with closure on Sunday 
December 8 12:00:00 UTC 2024, that is [clock format 1733659200]

My vote is:

     TIP #706: YES

Regards,

Francois




_______________________________________________
Tcl-Core mailing list
Tcl...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tcl-core

[TCLCORE] [CFV] TIP #706: Expose three Tk "In Context" functions via stubs table

[Francois V. <fvo...@fr...>]

Hi all,

Thanks for your comments on TIP #706. Having heard them, the TIP targets 
9.0.1.

This is the Call For Votes on TIP #706: Expose three Tk "In Context" 
functions via stubs table

     https://core.tcl-lang.org/tips/doc/trunk/tip/706.md

Le the voting period to be just a few days, with closure on Sunday 
December 8 12:00:00 UTC 2024, that is [clock format 1733659200]

My vote is:

     TIP #706: YES

Regards,

Francois

Re: [TCLCORE] TIP 707 - Proposed addition of a new Tcl_Obj internal rep field for pointer+size

[<apn...@ya...>]

Subsequent to today’s online meeting, given the unanimous support and desire to get it in place for 9.0.1, it has been decided to move up the CFV for TIP 707. Please review and comment within the next two days.

 

/Ashok

 

From: apnmbx-public--- via Tcl-Core <tcl...@li...> 
Sent: Monday, December 2, 2024 7:08 AM
To: tcl...@li...
Subject: [TCLCORE] TIP 707 - Proposed addition of a new Tcl_Obj internal rep field for pointer+size

 

As per discussion below, I’ve created TIP 707 for the proposal.

 

As the TIP is simple enough, and targeted towards the fast approaching 9.0.1, I plan to call for a vote in one week.

 

/Ashok

 

From: apnmbx-public--- via Tcl-Core <tcl...@li... <mailto:tcl...@li...> > 
Sent: Monday, December 2, 2024 5:31 AM
To: tcl...@li... <mailto:tcl...@li...> 
Subject: Re: [TCLCORE] Proposed addition of a new Tcl_Obj internal rep field for pointer+size

 

+1 to Brian’s point. Applies to extensions as well. At the very least I hesitate to include it in this TIP as it would make it far more controversial in my opinion.

 

TIP coming up…

 

From: Brian Griffin <bri...@ea... <mailto:bri...@ea...> > 
Sent: Monday, December 2, 2024 5:02 AM
To: Jan Nijtmans <jan...@gm... <mailto:jan...@gm...> >
Cc: apn...@ya... <mailto:apn...@ya...> ; tcl...@li... <mailto:tcl...@li...> 
Subject: Re: [TCLCORE] Proposed addition of a new Tcl_Obj internal rep field for pointer+size

 

I think the number of changes that you had to make in the core is a good example why this is not a good idea anywhere outside of a major version release, unfortunately. Although, I do applaud the approach to simplify coding.  

 

-Brian 

(from mobile device)

 

On Dec 1, 2024, at 15:03, Jan Nijtmans <jan...@gm... <mailto:jan...@gm...> > wrote:

 

Op zo 1 dec 2024 om 15:50 schreef apnmbx-public--- via Tcl-Core:

I would therefore like to add the following additional field to the Tcl_ObjIntenalRep union

 

struct {

   void *ptr;

   Tcl_Size size;

} ptrAndSize;

 

We could also take the opportunity to simplify things. How about

adding anonymous structures to the union:

    struct {

        void *ptr;

        void *ptr2;

    };

    struct {

        Tcl_Size size;

        Tcl_Size size2;

    };

That would enable us to write "size2" in stead of "ptrAndSize.size2", and

also "ptr" in stead of "twoPtrValue.ptr1". It would simplty a lot

lines of code, making it more readable:

      <https://core.tcl-lang.org/tcl/info/bf304129948c281a>

 

 Regards,

        Jan Nijtmans

 

_______________________________________________
Tcl-Core mailing list
Tcl...@li... <mailto:Tcl...@li...> 
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tcl-core

Re: [TCLCORE] TCL biweekly meeting on 2024-12-02

[Harald O. <har...@el...>]

Francois, Marc,
I am happy that you care that you are in the discussion!
It is clear, that any important information is via tickets or tcl core.

My experience with the now 4 years project of "deblocking 9.0" was that 
we need more and regular virtual meetings with informal exchange. There 
were times, we had 2 per week and this was important for 9.0.
Now, it is biweekly one per week. Some prefer to discuss on tcl chat - 
ok. And we have the monthly meet-up.

I can also understand some frustration on your side - the decision to 
release Tk 9.0 together with Tcl 9.0 was done in those meetings. And the 
decission to delay TCL 8.7.

For me, the meetings are the most effective way to support Don as 
release manager and to de-block critical situations. I don't want to 
miss this.

Maybe, I can emphasis in the invitation, that this is informal and 
important decision relevant points should be discussed within tickets or 
on the core list?

And it was for me a happening to have you two in the Tk meeting. This 
just makes the community happy, to feel as one and to participate.
I appreciate all your awesome work !

A bit a strange message, sorry.
I hope, you get the feeling.

Take care,
Harald

Am 02.12.2024 um 07:53 schrieb Francois Vogel:
> I'm in strong agreement with Marc on this, I definitely wanted to 
> express my support on his point. He couldn't have expressed my feeling 
> more accurately.
> 
> BTW I can't attend.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Francois
> 
> Le 02/12/2024 à 02:59, Marc Culler a écrit :
>> While I think it is fine to discuss TIPs at the virtual meeting, I 
>> think care should be taken to make sure that the virtual discussion 
>> does not replace the discussion on this list, which people need in 
>> order to decide how to vote.  A major reason is that there is no 
>> record of what people say at the virtual meeting, and summaries of 
>> virtual discussions are not equivalent to actual (written) discussion.
>>
>> - Marc
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 1, 2024 at 3:50 PM Harald Oehlmann 
>> <har...@el...> wrote:
>>
>>     Dear TCL/Tk team,
>>     may I remind you about the next biweekly TCL/Tk meeting in around
>>     36 hours:
>>
>>     2024-12-02 12:00 UTC
>>     Duration: 1 hour
>>     On Jitzi: https://meet.jit.si/TclMonthlyMeetup
>>
>>     Topics:
>>     TCL 8.6.16 release support
>>     TCL 9.0.1 release support
>>     TIP 705: Affirm TCL Licence
>>     TIP 706: Expose 3 Tk routines
>>
>>     This meeting is explicitly for anybody, not only TCT members.
>>
>>     Hope to see you tomorrow,
>>     Harald

Re: [TCLCORE] TCL biweekly meeting on 2024-12-02

[Steve L. <st...@di...>]

10 attendees - Harald, Andreas, Brian, Don, Julian, Alex, Ashok, Jan, Vadim and myself.

Highlights ..

Don flagged he is working towards Tcl 9.01 once the current TIPs are accepted or rejected.  TCT members present indicated support for TIP 706.   Tcl 8.6.16 is being prepared, the main change is the clock fix.

Julian led a good discussion about his zipfs work and it will be merged to core after more testing and looking at edge cases.

Vadim mentioned that PerlTk is progressing.

Others can add their personal highlights to these

Next meeting is Dec 23 at 1200 UTC.

-- Steve
On 2 Dec 2024 at 5:51 AM +0800, Harald Oehlmann <har...@el...>, wrote:
> Dear TCL/Tk team,
> may I remind you about the next biweekly TCL/Tk meeting in around 36 hours:
>
> 2024-12-02 12:00 UTC
> Duration: 1 hour
> On Jitzi: https://meet.jit.si/TclMonthlyMeetup
>
> Topics:
> TCL 8.6.16 release support
> TCL 9.0.1 release support
> TIP 705: Affirm TCL Licence
> TIP 706: Expose 3 Tk routines
>
> This meeting is explicitly for anybody, not only TCT members.
>
> Hope to see you tomorrow,
> Harald
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tcl-Core mailing list
> Tcl...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tcl-core

[TCLCORE] Tcl is now on Mastodon

[Torsten B. <be...@ty...>]

Dear all,

on the chat, we have talked a bit about Tcl's representation in social media. There is a Twitter/X account that already runs for a long time. It is mainly used for announcements (see here: https://wiki.tcl-lang.org/page/Twitter).

Now, I thought it would be the time for something new. As a part of the initiative to renew Tcl's manual pages, website and it's online presentation as a whole, I have now opened an account on Mastodon.

Ashok and Arjen (as admins of the Twitter channel) and others agree to closing the Twitter channel and move the activity from there over to Mastodon. In order to reach a wider audience, this account will also be bridged to Bluesky so people can follow the content from there also and interact.

The idea is to not only post announcements but also give some hints and coding snippets, make a series presenting all the new features in Tcl 9, point people at interesting pages from the wiki and lots of other bits and pieces.

You are welcome to contribute! Just drop me an email or write a direct message to the Mastodon account. Here it is:

https://fosstodon.org/@tcl_tk

By the way, the @tcltk account was already taken on fosstodon (it started in August 2023 but has no posts and cannot be followed) so I went with @tcl_tk instead (which is maybe even better).

The bridge to Bluesky doesn't work yet but I hope I can make that work soon (it should work out of the box by just following @bsk...@bs... on Mastodon but somehow nothing happens ... I have activated it for my private Mastodon account and had similar issues there but finally it worked somehow).

Thanks to @dbohdan for making the contact to fosstodon.org so we can have an account there.

Best wishes, Torsten

Re: [TCLCORE] Proposed addition of a new Tcl_Obj internal rep field for pointer+size

[Jan N. <jan...@gm...>]

Op ma 2 dec 2024 om 00:32 schreef Brian Griffin <bri...@ea...>:

> I think the number of changes that you had to make in the core is a good
> example why this is not a good idea anywhere outside of a major version
> release, unfortunately. Although, I do applaud the approach to simplify
> coding.
>

Well, my actual counter-proposal is this:
     <https://core.tcl-lang.org/tcl/info/904cd27d0ebf1e4a>

No changes are necessary in the core, all old constructs still work. The
added
TCL_NO_DEPRECATED was meant to indicate which ones are not
necessary any more, not part of the actual counter-proposal

Hope this helps,
     Jan Nijtmans

Re: [TCLCORE] TCL biweekly meeting on 2024-12-02

[Francois V. <fvo...@fr...>]

I'm in strong agreement with Marc on this, I definitely wanted to 
express my support on his point. He couldn't have expressed my feeling 
more accurately.

BTW I can't attend.

Regards,

Francois

Le 02/12/2024 à 02:59, Marc Culler a écrit :
> While I think it is fine to discuss TIPs at the virtual meeting, I 
> think care should be taken to make sure that the virtual discussion 
> does not replace the discussion on this list, which people need in 
> order to decide how to vote.  A major reason is that there is no 
> record of what people say at the virtual meeting, and summaries of 
> virtual discussions are not equivalent to actual (written) discussion.
>
> - Marc
>
> On Sun, Dec 1, 2024 at 3:50 PM Harald Oehlmann 
> <har...@el...> wrote:
>
>     Dear TCL/Tk team,
>     may I remind you about the next biweekly TCL/Tk meeting in around
>     36 hours:
>
>     2024-12-02 12:00 UTC
>     Duration: 1 hour
>     On Jitzi: https://meet.jit.si/TclMonthlyMeetup
>
>     Topics:
>     TCL 8.6.16 release support
>     TCL 9.0.1 release support
>     TIP 705: Affirm TCL Licence
>     TIP 706: Expose 3 Tk routines
>
>     This meeting is explicitly for anybody, not only TCT members.
>
>     Hope to see you tomorrow,
>     Harald
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Tcl-Core mailing list
>     Tcl...@li...
>     https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tcl-core
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tcl-Core mailing list
> Tcl...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tcl-core

Re: [TCLCORE] TCL biweekly meeting on 2024-12-02

[Marc C. <cul...@gm...>]

While I think it is fine to discuss TIPs at the virtual meeting, I think
care should be taken to make sure that the virtual discussion does not
replace the discussion on this list, which people need in order to decide
how to vote.  A major reason is that there is no record of what people say
at the virtual meeting, and summaries of virtual discussions are not
equivalent to actual (written) discussion.

- Marc

On Sun, Dec 1, 2024 at 3:50 PM Harald Oehlmann <har...@el...>
wrote:

> Dear TCL/Tk team,
> may I remind you about the next biweekly TCL/Tk meeting in around 36 hours:
>
> 2024-12-02 12:00 UTC
> Duration: 1 hour
> On Jitzi: https://meet.jit.si/TclMonthlyMeetup
>
> Topics:
> TCL 8.6.16 release support
> TCL 9.0.1 release support
> TIP 705: Affirm TCL Licence
> TIP 706: Expose 3 Tk routines
>
> This meeting is explicitly for anybody, not only TCT members.
>
> Hope to see you tomorrow,
> Harald
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tcl-Core mailing list
> Tcl...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tcl-core
>

[TCLCORE] TIP 707 - Proposed addition of a new Tcl_Obj internal rep field for pointer+size

[<apn...@ya...>]

As per discussion below, I’ve created TIP 707 for the proposal.

 

As the TIP is simple enough, and targeted towards the fast approaching 9.0.1, I plan to call for a vote in one week.

 

/Ashok

 

From: apnmbx-public--- via Tcl-Core <tcl...@li...> 
Sent: Monday, December 2, 2024 5:31 AM
To: tcl...@li...
Subject: Re: [TCLCORE] Proposed addition of a new Tcl_Obj internal rep field for pointer+size

 

+1 to Brian’s point. Applies to extensions as well. At the very least I hesitate to include it in this TIP as it would make it far more controversial in my opinion.

 

TIP coming up…

 

From: Brian Griffin <bri...@ea... <mailto:bri...@ea...> > 
Sent: Monday, December 2, 2024 5:02 AM
To: Jan Nijtmans <jan...@gm... <mailto:jan...@gm...> >
Cc: apn...@ya... <mailto:apn...@ya...> ; tcl...@li... <mailto:tcl...@li...> 
Subject: Re: [TCLCORE] Proposed addition of a new Tcl_Obj internal rep field for pointer+size

 

I think the number of changes that you had to make in the core is a good example why this is not a good idea anywhere outside of a major version release, unfortunately. Although, I do applaud the approach to simplify coding.  

 

-Brian 

(from mobile device)

 

On Dec 1, 2024, at 15:03, Jan Nijtmans <jan...@gm... <mailto:jan...@gm...> > wrote:

 

Op zo 1 dec 2024 om 15:50 schreef apnmbx-public--- via Tcl-Core:

I would therefore like to add the following additional field to the Tcl_ObjIntenalRep union

 

struct {

   void *ptr;

   Tcl_Size size;

} ptrAndSize;

 

We could also take the opportunity to simplify things. How about

adding anonymous structures to the union:

    struct {

        void *ptr;

        void *ptr2;

    };

    struct {

        Tcl_Size size;

        Tcl_Size size2;

    };

That would enable us to write "size2" in stead of "ptrAndSize.size2", and

also "ptr" in stead of "twoPtrValue.ptr1". It would simplty a lot

lines of code, making it more readable:

      <https://core.tcl-lang.org/tcl/info/bf304129948c281a>

 

 Regards,

        Jan Nijtmans

 

_______________________________________________
Tcl-Core mailing list
Tcl...@li... <mailto:Tcl...@li...> 
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tcl-core

Re: [TCLCORE] TCL biweekly meeting on 2024-12-02

[<apn...@ya...>]

I would also like to add Julian's zipfs offsets related ticket and proposed patch (https://core.tcl-lang.org/tcl/tktview/aaa84fbbc5) to the meeting agenda.

(Julian, it would be helpful if you could join).

/Ashok

-----Original Message-----
From: Harald Oehlmann <har...@el...> 
Sent: Monday, December 2, 2024 3:20 AM
To: Tcl Core List <tcl...@li...>
Subject: [TCLCORE] TCL biweekly meeting on 2024-12-02

Dear TCL/Tk team,
may I remind you about the next biweekly TCL/Tk meeting in around 36 hours:

2024-12-02 12:00 UTC
Duration: 1 hour
On Jitzi: https://meet.jit.si/TclMonthlyMeetup

Topics:
TCL 8.6.16 release support
TCL 9.0.1 release support
TIP 705: Affirm TCL Licence
TIP 706: Expose 3 Tk routines

This meeting is explicitly for anybody, not only TCT members.

Hope to see you tomorrow,
Harald

Re: [TCLCORE] Proposed addition of a new Tcl_Obj internal rep field for pointer+size

[<apn...@ya...>]

+1 to Brian’s point. Applies to extensions as well. At the very least I hesitate to include it in this TIP as it would make it far more controversial in my opinion.

 

TIP coming up…

 

From: Brian Griffin <bri...@ea...> 
Sent: Monday, December 2, 2024 5:02 AM
To: Jan Nijtmans <jan...@gm...>
Cc: apn...@ya...; tcl...@li...
Subject: Re: [TCLCORE] Proposed addition of a new Tcl_Obj internal rep field for pointer+size

 

I think the number of changes that you had to make in the core is a good example why this is not a good idea anywhere outside of a major version release, unfortunately. Although, I do applaud the approach to simplify coding.  

 

-Brian 

(from mobile device)





On Dec 1, 2024, at 15:03, Jan Nijtmans <jan...@gm... <mailto:jan...@gm...> > wrote:

 

Op zo 1 dec 2024 om 15:50 schreef apnmbx-public--- via Tcl-Core:

I would therefore like to add the following additional field to the Tcl_ObjIntenalRep union

 

struct {

   void *ptr;

   Tcl_Size size;

} ptrAndSize;

 

We could also take the opportunity to simplify things. How about

adding anonymous structures to the union:

    struct {

        void *ptr;

        void *ptr2;

    };

    struct {

        Tcl_Size size;

        Tcl_Size size2;

    };

That would enable us to write "size2" in stead of "ptrAndSize.size2", and

also "ptr" in stead of "twoPtrValue.ptr1". It would simplty a lot

lines of code, making it more readable:

      <https://core.tcl-lang.org/tcl/info/bf304129948c281a>

 

 Regards,

        Jan Nijtmans

 

_______________________________________________
Tcl-Core mailing list
Tcl...@li... <mailto:Tcl...@li...> 
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tcl-core

Re: [TCLCORE] Proposed addition of a new Tcl_Obj internal rep field for pointer+size

[Brian G. <bri...@ea...>]

I think the number of changes that you had to make in the core is a good example why this is not a good idea anywhere outside of a major version release, unfortunately. Although, I do applaud the approach to simplify coding.

-Brian
(from mobile device)

On Dec 1, 2024, at 15:03, Jan Nijtmans <jan...@gm...> wrote:


Op zo 1 dec 2024 om 15:50 schreef apnmbx-public--- via Tcl-Core:
I would therefore like to add the following additional field to the Tcl_ObjIntenalRep union

struct {
   void *ptr;
   Tcl_Size size;
} ptrAndSize;

We could also take the opportunity to simplify things. How about
adding anonymous structures to the union:

    struct {

        void *ptr;

        void *ptr2;

    };

    struct {

        Tcl_Size size;

        Tcl_Size size2;

    };

That would enable us to write "size2" in stead of "ptrAndSize.size2", and
also "ptr" in stead of "twoPtrValue.ptr1". It would simplty a lot
lines of code, making it more readable:
      <https://core.tcl-lang.org/tcl/info/bf304129948c281a>

 Regards,
        Jan Nijtmans

_______________________________________________
Tcl-Core mailing list
Tcl...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tcl-core

Re: [TCLCORE] Proposed addition of a new Tcl_Obj internal rep field for pointer+size

[Jan N. <jan...@gm...>]

Op zo 1 dec 2024 om 15:50 schreef apnmbx-public--- via Tcl-Core:

> I would therefore like to add the following additional field to the
> Tcl_ObjIntenalRep union
>
>
>
> struct {
>
>    void *ptr;
>
>    Tcl_Size size;
>
> } ptrAndSize;
>

We could also take the opportunity to simplify things. How about
adding anonymous structures to the union:

    struct {

        void *ptr;

        void *ptr2;

    };

    struct {

        Tcl_Size size;

        Tcl_Size size2;

    };

That would enable us to write "size2" in stead of "ptrAndSize.size2", and
also "ptr" in stead of "twoPtrValue.ptr1". It would simplty a lot
lines of code, making it more readable:
      <https://core.tcl-lang.org/tcl/info/bf304129948c281a>

 Regards,
        Jan Nijtmans

[TCLCORE] TCL biweekly meeting on 2024-12-02

[Harald O. <har...@el...>]

Dear TCL/Tk team,
may I remind you about the next biweekly TCL/Tk meeting in around 36 hours:

2024-12-02 12:00 UTC
Duration: 1 hour
On Jitzi: https://meet.jit.si/TclMonthlyMeetup

Topics:
TCL 8.6.16 release support
TCL 9.0.1 release support
TIP 705: Affirm TCL Licence
TIP 706: Expose 3 Tk routines

This meeting is explicitly for anybody, not only TCT members.

Hope to see you tomorrow,
Harald

Re: [TCLCORE] Proposed addition of a new Tcl_Obj internal rep field for pointer+size

[Brian G. <bri...@ea...>]

On Dec 1, 2024, at 06:51, apnmbx-public--- via Tcl-Core <tcl...@li...> wrote:


Custom Tcl_Obj’s often require a pointer and length internal representation. In Tcl 8, the Tcl_Obj.internalRep.ptrAndLongRep field targeted this use case.

With Tcl 9, where supported lengths on 64-bit platforms are greater than ULONG_MAX on Windows, this no longer suffices for the purpose. Hijacking the twoPtrValue field involves casts, not desirable imo.

I would therefore like to add the following additional field to the Tcl_ObjIntenalRep union

struct {
   void *ptr;
   Tcl_Size size;
} ptrAndSize;

Note Tcl_Size was chosen, not Tcl_WideInt,  ptrdiff_t or size_t so that the size of Tcl_Obj is not affected on any platform for both 32- and 64-bit Tcl 9 and 8.7.

I would like to see this for 9.0.1.

Anybody have objections?

No objections from me.


Is this something that would need a TIP and a vote?

I would think so, even though it has no material compatibility impact. The TIP would document the intent and agreement.

-Brian


/Ashok
_______________________________________________
Tcl-Core mailing list
Tcl...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tcl-core