Thanks Jürgen,
I'd like to keep the situation i gave in my post using the ')copy fns.enz'
method as i do fns developement first in the apl ws then test it with apl
scripting then to the libapl program and using the apl_exec method you gave
would not be practicle.
could you give it an analysis as i think this is a bug and fixing it would be a
real plus to the apl/scripting/libapl system
thanks
enztec
On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 16:28:26 +0100
Dr. Jürgen Sauermann <m...@xn--jrgen-sauermann-zvb.de> wrote:
> Hi enztec,
>
> see below.
>
> On 3/6/23 9:31 PM, enz...@gmx.com wrote:
> Hi
>
> it doesn't seem possible to create apl fns with apl_command or apl_exec
> directly using libapl This premiss seems wrong:
>
> #include <apl/libapl.h>
>
> // compile with: gcc libapl_test.c -L /usr/local/lib/apl -lapl -lstdc++ -o
> libapl_test
>
> int
> main(int argc, char * argv[])
> {
> init_libapl(argv[0], 0);
>
> apl_exec( "TEXT ← ⊂ 'Z←A SUM B'" );
> apl_exec( "TEXT ← TEXT, ⊂ 'Z←A + B'" );
> apl_exec( "⎕FX TEXT" );
> apl_command( ")FNS" );
> apl_exec( "'⎕CR SUM:' (⎕CR 'SUM')" );
> apl_exec( "1 SUM 2" );
> }
>
> which produces:
>
> eedjsa@server68:~/apl-1.8/src$ ./libapl_test
> SUM
> ⎕CR SUM: Z←A SUM B
> Z←A + B
> 3
>
> Or, even shorter:
>
> apl_exec( "⎕FX 'Z←A SUM B' 'Z←A + B'");
>
>
>
>
> On 3/6/23 9:31 PM, enz...@gmx.com wrote:
> Hi
>
> it doesn't seem possible to create apl fns with apl_command or apl_exec
> directly using libapl
> but i can successfully create a llibapl environment with fns and variables
> with the following setup and workaround
>
> -
>
> 2 files fns.enz and fns.c
>
> --
>
> situation 1 : shows good fns created from fns.enz
>
> /usr/local/bin/apl fns.enz
>
> in apl workspace run
> f1
> f2 not created if it's fns definition header is commented in
> fns.enz but is created if uncommented
>
> --
>
> situation 2 :
>
> /usr/local/bin/apl
>
> in apl workspace run
> )copy fns.enz
> f1
> f2 not created if it's fns definition header is commented in
> fns.enz but is created if uncommented
>
> --
>
> situation 3 :
>
> g++ -O2 fns.c -o fns -L /usr/local/lib/apl -lapl
> ./fns gives my output below and creates fns1.xml fns2.xml and fns3.xml
> that can hopefully be of use for analysis of what is happening
>
> in fns.c i can use apl_command(")copy fns.enz"); or apl_exec(")copy
> fns.enz"); with the fns definition header workaround to get working fns f1
> and f2
> but without the f1 and f2 fns definition headers in fns.c i get no f1 or f2
> created
>
> in the fns.enz ∇f1 and ∇f2 fns definition headers don't work as would
> hope/expect without the f1 and f2 function definition workaround in fns.c
>
> as you can see in the fns.c after the )copy fns.enz if i do a workaround
> apl_exec("∇f1"); i get good fns f1 and f2
>
> it seems the ∇f1 fns header doesn't work but the bodies of the fns in
> fns.enz and closing ∇ are in some 'buffer' and get put into the f1 fns when
> the f1 function header definitions workarounds is done in fns.c
>
> the interesting thing is is that if i comment the f1 fns definition header
> in the fns.enz the fns are still created by the corresponding workaround line
> in fns.c but if i leave it uncommented (which is what it would be if it
> worked) when i run the correspinding fns header workaround in fns.c it gives
> the syntax error when run but doesn't prevent it from creating the good f1
> fns - so it seems the f1 function definition header in fns.enz is doing
> something but not creating the fns.
>
> i left the fns.enz f1 function header uncommented and the fns.enz f2
> function header commented to show the difference
> fns f2 is not created in situation 1 or situation 2 if it's fns definition
> header is commented in fns.enz but commenting does not affect it's creation
> in situation 3 (libapl) if f2 workaround fns definition header is used in
> fns.c
>
> the correct order of the functions in fns.enz and the corresponding fns
> headers workarounds must be maintained to get proper working fns with the
> correct names
>
> i have been using this workaround successfully but would love to know what
> is happening and see if there can be a fix
>
> i have added 3 )save commands at 'strategic' points in fns,c to create
> the fns1.xml fns2.xml and fns3.xml in hope they give some information that
> can be used to analyze what is happening
>
> thanks,
>
> enztec
>
> ---
>
> this is my output from ./fns from libapl situation 3
>
> )wsid
> IS CLEAR WS
> )copy fns.enz
> DUMPED 2023-03-06 12:31:44 (GMT-7)
> )wsid
> IS CLEAR WS
>
> )wsid fns1
> WAS CLEAR WS
> )save
> 2023-03-06 13:11:51 (GMT-7) fns1
>
> ∇f1 workaround 1 in fns.c for f1 fns header in fns.enz
> SYNTAX ERROR+
> Tokenizer: No token for Unicode U+2207 (∇)
> Input: ∇f1
>
> )fns
> f1
>
> )wsid fns2
> WAS fns1
> )save
> 2023-03-06 13:11:51 (GMT-7) fns2
>
> ∇f2 workaround 2 in fns,c for f2 fns header in fns.enz
>
> )wsid fns3
> WAS fns2
> )save
> 2023-03-06 13:11:51 (GMT-7) fns3
>
> )fns
> f1 f2
>
> f1 fns executed
> ⍴⍕1 2 3 : 5
>
> f2 fns executed
> ⍴⍎"1 2 3" : 3
>
> ---
>
