tcllib-devel

[Tcllib-devel] Tcllib Release 1.8 Status and Action Plan

[Andreas K. <aku...@sh...>]

We are now in the last week before the release will be made.

The major new stuff is in the repository and I have the trackers a
bit. From now on please do not add any more major new code to the CVS
anymore. Minor new code, and bug fixes are still welcome. Please
remember to update the file "README-1.8.txt" whenever a checkin is
made.

My current plan is to freeze the Tcllib CVS at

	[clock format 1128625200]   (*)

then update the version number, tag the state, and generate a
pre-release distribution for testing Friday to Sunday. The only things
we will fix in that interval will be very major bugs and showstoppers.

On Monday this pre-release will then go into an ActiveTcl Release
Candidate. After Monday (Oct 10 (x)) till the end of that week only
showstoppers can go into the CVS.

After that the pre-release, or whatever is head, becomes the actual
release with updated tag, is announced, put on websites, etc., and at
least the CVS is unfrozen.


(*) This is from my Point of view, i.e. Pacific Time,
    Noon Thursday Oct 6.

(x) This is Canadian Thanksgiving btw.

-- 
So long,
	Andreas Kupries <aku...@sh...>
			<http://www.purl.org/NET/akupries/>
	Developer @	<http://www.activestate.com/>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: [Tcllib-devel] Tcllib Release 1.8 Status and Action Plan

[Arjen M. <arj...@wl...>]

Hello all,

I was just checking the various bug reports that are assigned to me
and I came across one (bug 1151935) that made me think:

In general what should happen if a mathematical function is to be
evaluated for a set of argument for which it is not defined?

In this case, the bug is that there is a division by zero and 
this is reported as such, rather than as a clearer message
that the coefficient of variation is not defined if the mean
of the data is zero.

My question:
- Should the function return such a (clearer) message or
- Should it return an empty string (not an error) thereby
  leaving it to the caller to handle the _undefined_ 
  situation

I can argue either way, but we should probably try for a
consistent practice.

Regards,

Arjen

Re: [Tcllib-devel] Tcllib Release 1.8 Status and Action Plan

[Gerald W. L. <Ger...@co...>]

Arjen Markus wrote:

>Hello all,
>
>I was just checking the various bug reports that are assigned to me
>and I came across one (bug 1151935) that made me think:
>
>In general what should happen if a mathematical function is to be
>evaluated for a set of argument for which it is not defined?
>
>In this case, the bug is that there is a division by zero and 
>this is reported as such, rather than as a clearer message
>that the coefficient of variation is not defined if the mean
>of the data is zero.
>
>My question:
>- Should the function return such a (clearer) message or
>- Should it return an empty string (not an error) thereby
>  leaving it to the caller to handle the _undefined_ 
>  situation
>
>I can argue either way, but we should probably try for a
>consistent practice.
>  
>
IMHO, I would emulate what sqrt() does in expr, namely:

    % expr {sqrt(-1.0)}
    domain error: argument not in valid range
    % set errorCode
    ARITH DOMAIN {domain error: argument not in valid range}
    % set errorInfo
    domain error: argument not in valid range
        while executing
    "expr {sqrt(-1.0)}"

In other words, raise an error -- but be sure to set error code to some 
appropriate list of informational elements.

Sincerly,
Gerald W. Lester

Re: [Tcllib-devel] Tcllib Release 1.8 Status and Action Plan

[Arjen M. <arj...@wl...>]

> "Gerald W. Lester" wrote:
> 

> >
> IMHO, I would emulate what sqrt() does in expr, namely:
> 
>      % expr {sqrt(-1.0)}
>      domain error: argument not in valid range
>      % set errorCode
>      ARITH DOMAIN {domain error: argument not in valid range}
>      % set errorInfo
>      domain error: argument not in valid range
>          while executing
>      "expr {sqrt(-1.0)}"
> 
> In other words, raise an error -- but be sure to set error code to
> some appropriate list of informational elements.
> 
> Sincerly,
> Gerald W. Lester

Yes, that is what I had in mind. Thanks

Regards,

Arjen

RE: [Tcllib-devel] Tcllib Release 1.8 Status and Action Plan

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

> In general what should happen if a mathematical function is to be
> evaluated for a set of argument for which it is not defined?
>
> In this case, the bug is that there is a division by zero and
> this is reported as such, rather than as a clearer message
> that the coefficient of variation is not defined if the mean
> of the data is zero.
>
> My question:
> - Should the function return such a (clearer) message or
> - Should it return an empty string (not an error) thereby
>   leaving it to the caller to handle the _undefined_
>   situation
>
> I can argue either way, but we should probably try for a
> consistent practice.

My personal opinion is to return a clear error message, even if that entails
catching and rethrowing errors.


--
	Andreas Kupries <and...@Ac...>
	Developer @ http://www.ActiveState.com, a division of Sophos
	Tel: +1 604 484 6491