Activity for Konstantin Aristov
-
Konstantin Aristov posted a comment on ticket #94
Hi Amul ! I think, the problem is much deeper ! We found another construction that gives an ambiguous result. s %gD=$$ZZCVToul("I"_%ident_$tr($j($g(%srvident),4)," ",0)_" ")_$$zcmd1(%gZD) If we do this in two steps, the result will be correct. s %gD=$$ZZCVToul("I"_%ident_$tr($j($g(%srvident),4)," ",0)_" ") s %gD=%gD_$$zcmd1(%gZD) This is a string from a real program, but I will try to prepare a simpler example (if I can). I think the variable $gtm_side_effects should not affect the handling of concatenation....
-
Hi Amul! Thanks for your answer ! However, there are no complaints to the Write. Why when calculating the Set command argument in the first part of the expression, the elements are calculated sequentially, and in the second, the increment is calculated before the value of the variable a is taken ? Have a nice day !
-
Result, of course :-)
-
Sorry, ddd 2 rrr 2 ttt 3 and ddd 2 rrr 3 ttt 3 Of course !
-
Different resultat in the same expression
-
Hi Amul ! Thanks for your responce !
-
Fatal ERROR in indirection
-
Hi, Amul ! Thanks for patch, we now use it. However, we found another error related to optimization. An error exists since version 6.3-001. We have code transferred from the cache and adapted for GT.M. A simple example: xexistJob(%this,job) new exist set exist=$select($zv["GT.M":$zgetjpi(job,"isprocalive"),1:##class(%Obj(z,"Util")).DataProc(job)) quit exist From the point of view of GT.M there is a syntax error, which is found at compilation: GTM>w $zv GT.M V6.3-000A Linux x86_64 GTM>zlink "newerr.m"...
-
Compile optimisation changed in GT.M 6.3
-
Amul, thank you for the correction. We will continue testing it.
-
Thanks, Amul ! I'll try it.
-
Hi ! I have bad news about patch for f_select.c from https://sourceforge.net/p/fis-gtm/bugs/90/#e517...
-
Dhear Roger ! Thank you for a patch, it works well! About change naked links I was...
-
i'm really sorry ! In 6.0 variable gtm_boolean not work in this case too. First example...
-
Hi, Roger ! Sorry, may be my example is not simple enought... I will simplify it...
-
Hi, Roger ! I think it requires some explanation of my examples. 1. Why the first...
-
Hi, Roger ! I think it requires some explanation of my examples. 1. Why the first...
-
In the first two examples, the error does not occur, but the naked reference is ...
-
The strange compile order in logical expression
-
Hi Bill ! I think this is an inaccurate description of the problem. My example gives...
-
line 254 of sr_port/op_merge.c
-
BUG in MERGE, wrong control Maximum number of subscripts
-
Dear Maury ! I thought that is the standard behavior GT.M in this example. does not...
-
Hi, Bill ! Thanks for the answer. We look forward to the new release. Thanks, Ko...
-
The strange behavior of the function $S() in logical expression
-
Hi! The gtm_boolean and gtm_side_effects is 0. This simple example shows the relationship:...
-
Hi! The gtm_boolean and gtm_side_effects is 0. This simple example shows the relationship:...
-
Hi! The gtm_boolean and gtm_side_effects is 0. This simple example shows the relationship:...
1