Discussion http://forum.blackboxframework.org/view ... f=40&t=499
Diffs http://redmine.blackboxframework.org/pr ... 3e1d01b11f
I am assuming that Josef' solution is the one that has been pushed.
issue-#126 Compiler TRAP for SYSTEM.VAL(LONGINT, intreg)
- DGDanforth
- Posts: 1061
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 1:16 am
- Location: Palo Alto, California, USA
- Contact:
Re: issue-#126 Compiler TRAP for SYSTEM.VAL(LONGINT, intreg)
I am not voting yet as the discussion does not appear to be finished.
(I may not be able to vote until Tuesday as I am going away, and will have limited WiFi access.)
(I may not be able to vote until Tuesday as I am going away, and will have limited WiFi access.)
-
- Posts: 1700
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 12:21 am
- Location: Russia
Re: issue-#126 Compiler TRAP for SYSTEM.VAL(LONGINT, intreg)
I want to point your attention to one interesting point
That this voting will be finished if somebody else make any choice to reach the quorum.
So the democracy will win and we will finish this painful discussion.
That this voting will be finished if somebody else make any choice to reach the quorum.
So the democracy will win and we will finish this painful discussion.
-
- Posts: 1700
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 12:21 am
- Location: Russia
Re: issue-#126 Compiler TRAP for SYSTEM.VAL(LONGINT, intreg)
Please take a look for alternative solution.
http://forum.blackboxframework.org/view ... 4604#p4601
It makes the VAL fit the Platform Specific Issues documentation.
I am suggesting to make calls and operations be forbidden as the second argument of VAL.
There should be variables and constants only.
http://forum.blackboxframework.org/view ... 4604#p4601
It makes the VAL fit the Platform Specific Issues documentation.
I am suggesting to make calls and operations be forbidden as the second argument of VAL.
There should be variables and constants only.
Re: issue-#126 Compiler TRAP for SYSTEM.VAL(LONGINT, intreg)
Ivan, you are wasting our time. There is no need for this change. It breaks old software.
Please, please, please stop the discussion at this topic.
You should take your time and solve the StdFolds problem. Otherwise we have to roll back to version 1.6
- Helmut
Please, please, please stop the discussion at this topic.
You should take your time and solve the StdFolds problem. Otherwise we have to roll back to version 1.6
- Helmut
-
- Posts: 1700
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 12:21 am
- Location: Russia
Re: issue-#126 Compiler TRAP for SYSTEM.VAL(LONGINT, intreg)
We already made old software incompatible with 1.7. So I do not see any problem with this. Transition is trivial. I have made it for the whole BlackBox in 15 minutes.Zinn wrote:Ivan, you are wasting our time. There is no need for this change. It breaks old software.
Please, please, please stop the discussion at this topic.
You should take your time and solve the StdFolds problem. Otherwise we have to roll back to version 1.6
I am suggesting to fix the problem in the root and at the same time reduce complexity of the system.
Now I know from the designer that this complexity is the initial design for "confusing russians" so it is much work to do for make it simple as AK-47.
Re: issue-#126 Compiler TRAP for SYSTEM.VAL(LONGINT, intreg)
Unnecessary change is always a problem.
-
- Posts: 1700
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 12:21 am
- Location: Russia
Re: issue-#126 Compiler TRAP for SYSTEM.VAL(LONGINT, intreg)
I had sent you detailed instructions how to do this with your Ubuntu. It is not hard. Try to do this single commit for the final release. This will be symbolical because there are a lot of your's work in it.Zinn wrote:You should take your time and solve the StdFolds problem.
- DGDanforth
- Posts: 1061
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 1:16 am
- Location: Palo Alto, California, USA
- Contact:
Re: issue-#126 Compiler TRAP for SYSTEM.VAL(LONGINT, intreg)
The vote passes and is implemented with "ELSE" rather than "RETURN".