Re: is_deeply() is painful
On Apr 26, 2006, at 21:05, chromatic wrote: Multidispatch helps, but :multi( Array, Array ) or :multi( Hash, Hash ) don't work based on the capabilities of the PMC. That's fine. does_foo = does $Px, 'array' # 'hash' might help. There should be no problem with .Hash, but there are a lot of array types around. leo
Re: MSWin32 (Visual C++ 8.0) Test Results (r12017)
chromatic wrote: On Saturday 25 March 2006 07:47, Ron Blaschke wrote: t/configure/step.t $fromfile and $tofile needs to be closed before calling move_if_diff, as Windows can't delete open files. I forgot to check this in a while back, but fixed now as #16032 (I hope). Thanks, seems to work fine. Ron
Re: Win32 Env Mysteries
jerry gay wrote: On 12/22/05, Ron Blaschke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Tuesday, December 20, 2005, 8:09:32 PM, François PERRAD wrote: At 11:53 16/12/2005 +0100, you wrote: I can think of two ways to fix this: - Hide every env access behind the platform stuff. That is, add something like Parrot_environ. For me, this way sounds better. The platform/env.c already exists in only two flavors (generic & win32). Right. The format of GetEnvironmentStrings differs from _environ, so there's some conversion necessary. " LPVOID GetEnvironmentStrings(void); If the function succeeds, the return value is a pointer to the environment block of the current process. " Would this be a reasonable interface? char ** Parrot_get_environ(); void Parrot_free_environ(char **env); - Provide platform specific PMCs. That is, there are two different env.pmc implementations, depending on the platform. This would be simpler, more isolated and probably more efficient because it avoids another level of indirection. Ron sorry for the late response. this seems quite reasonable. patches welcome :) Great! I'll come up with something. Ron
MSWin32 (Visual C++ 8.0) Test Results (r12442)
Here's another round of test results on my box. I've also added the details for the tests that failed. The C and are not unexpected on Windows. Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed --- t/doc/pod.t3 768 11663 0.26% 24 738 820 t/op/calling.t 1 256921 1.09% 91 t/pmc/complex.t1 256531 1.89% 33 t/pmc/env.t2 512122 16.67% 9-10 t/pmc/objects.t1 256731 1.37% 73 (22 subtests UNEXPECTEDLY SUCCEEDED), 17 tests and 361 subtests skipped. Failed 5/233 test scripts, 97.85% okay. 8/5860 subtests failed, 99.86% okay. t/op/calling.NOK 91# Failed test (t/op/calling.t at line 2327) # got: ' # 22 # 33 # ' # expected: '11 # 22 # 33 # ' # Looks like you failed 1 test of 92. t/op/calling.dubious Test returned status 1 (wstat 256, 0x100) DIED. FAILED test 91 Failed 1/92 tests, 98.91% okay (less 1 skipped test: 90 okay, 97.83%) t/pmc/complexNOK 33# Failed test (t/pmc/complex.t at line 1024) # got: ' # ln(0+0i) # got -1.#INF00+0.00i # not -inf+0.00i # done # ' # expected: 'done # ' t/pmc/complexok 53/53# Looks like you failed 1 test of 53. t/pmc/complexdubious Test returned status 1 (wstat 256, 0x100) DIED. FAILED test 33 Failed 1/53 tests, 98.11% okay (less 3 skipped tests: 49 okay, 92.45%) t/pmc/envNOK 9# Failed test (t/pmc/env.t at line 168) # got: '0 # ' # expected: '3 # ' t/pmc/envNOK 10# Failed test (t/pmc/env.t at line 191) # got: '0.00 # ' # expected: '3.00 # ' # Looks like you failed 2 tests of 12. t/pmc/envdubious Test returned status 2 (wstat 512, 0x200) DIED. FAILED tests 9-10 Failed 2/12 tests, 83.33% okay (less 1 skipped test: 9 okay, 75.00%) t/pmc/objectsNOK 73# Failed test (t/pmc/objects.t at line 2122) # got: 'error:imcc:The opcode 'isa_i_p_kc' (isa<3>) was not found. Check the type and number of the arguments # in file 'D:\src\parrot\t\pmc\objects_73.pir' line 6 # ' # expected: '0 # ' # '.\parrot.exe --gc-debug "D:\src\parrot\t\pmc\objects_73.pir"' failed with exit code 18 # Looks like you failed 1 test of 73. t/pmc/objectsdubious Test returned status 1 (wstat 256, 0x100) DIED. FAILED test 73 Failed 1/73 tests, 98.63% okay (less 2 skipped tests: 70 okay, 95.89%) t/compilers/pge/p5regexp/p5rxok 290/800 skipped: bugs | errors | trailing modifiers, 22/800 unexpectedly succeeded t/doc/podNOK 24# Failed test (t/doc/pod.t at line 62) # D:/src/parrot/compilers/pge/PGE/P6Regex.pir (1236): You forgot a '=back' before '=head1' t/doc/podok 628/1166 # Failed test (t/doc/pod.t at line 62) # D:/src/parrot/compilers/pge/PGE/Regex.pir (28): Unknown directive: =over4 # D:/src/parrot/compilers/pge/PGE/Regex.pir (30): '=item' outside of any '=over' t/doc/podok 783/1166 # Failed test (t/doc/pod.t at line 62) # D:/src/parrot/compilers/pge/PGE/Exp.pir (39): '=item' outside of any '=over' t/doc/podok 1138/1166# Looks like you failed 3 tests of 1166. t/doc/poddubious Test returned status 3 (wstat 768, 0x300) DIED. FAILED tests 24, 738, 820 Failed 3/1166 tests, 99.74% okay
Re: MSWin32 (Visual C++ 8.0) Test Results (r12442)
On 4/27/06, Ron Blaschke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Here's another round of test results on my box. I've also added the > details for the tests that failed. The C and > are not unexpected on Windows. > > Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed > --- > t/doc/pod.t3 768 11663 0.26% 24 738 820 fixed, r12443. > t/op/calling.t 1 256921 1.09% 91 > t/pmc/complex.t1 256531 1.89% 33 > t/pmc/env.t2 512122 16.67% 9-10 > t/pmc/objects.t1 256731 1.37% 73 these are all expected, at the moment. > (22 subtests UNEXPECTEDLY SUCCEEDED), 17 tests and 361 subtests skipped. pmichaud++ # more passing p5regex tests i'll update p5rx.t to un-todo these. thanks for reporting. ~jerry
Re: MSWin32 (Visual C++ 8.0) Test Results (r12442)
On Thu, 27 Apr 2006, jerry gay wrote: > On 4/27/06, Ron Blaschke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Here's another round of test results on my box. I've also added the > > details for the tests that failed. The C and > > are not unexpected on Windows. > > > > > Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed > > --- > > t/doc/pod.t3 768 11663 0.26% 24 738 820 > fixed, r12443. > > > t/op/calling.t 1 256921 1.09% 91 > > t/pmc/complex.t1 256531 1.89% 33 > > t/pmc/env.t2 512122 16.67% 9-10 > > t/pmc/objects.t1 256731 1.37% 73 > these are all expected, at the moment. They are? Is the list of "expected failuers" anywhere obvious? I don't see it anywhere obvious either in the source or in the recent perl6-internals archives. Perhaps I've missed it somewhere. -- Andy Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [perl #38957] hash test failures
On Fri, 21 Apr 2006, Andy Dougherty wrote: > On Fri, 21 Apr 2006, Will Coleda wrote: > > > OSX 10.4.6, PPC > > > > This failure has been pretty persistent the past few weeks: > > > > t/src/hash.t1 256111 9.09% 6 > > > > # got: '42 > > # hash_6(4373,0xa000ed98) malloc: *** error for object 0x1d14140: > > incorrect checksum for freed object - object was probably modified > > after being freed, break at szone_error to debug > > # hash_6(4373,0xa000ed98) malloc: *** set a breakpoint in szone_error > > to debug > > # hash_6(4373,0xa000ed98) malloc: *** error for object 0x1d14140: > > incorrect checksum for freed object - object was probably modified > > after being freed, break at szone_error to debug > > # hash_6(4373,0xa000ed98) malloc: *** set a breakpoint in szone_error > > to debug > > # ' > > # expected: '42 > > That test has been dumping core for me (Solaris 8/SPARC) for quite a long > time (since last summer at least, I think). I tried to see if it's still > there in the current code, but my build & test script aborted at the > Configure.pl stage (due to the changed perl version requirements). This test still core dumps for me. I've traced it down a good bit -- it's a garbage collection problem. Specifically, in t/src/hash_6.c, the variable 'hash' is declared in the function 'the_test', and memory allocated with hash = PMC_struct_val(h); A big string 'big' is then created. The program then calls string_from_cstring(). The ensuing sequence is something like (This is all from printf() statements -- the debugger gets confused, as do I!): string_from_cstring() -> string_make_direct() -> Parrot_allocate_string() -> mem_allocate() -> Parrot_dod_ms_run() -> Parrot_forall_header_pools() -> sweep_cb() -> Parrot_dod_sweep() ... ??? ... mem_sys_free() -> free(from) where from == hash. (At the ??? point, I lose track of what's happening) Not surprisingly, the program crashes later on at hash_put(interpreter, hash, key, i); Unfortunately, this failure is in the dod_sweep() stuff, which I really don't understand at all, so I don't know how to proceed from here. -- Andy Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[perl #39013] [PATCH] Two more uninitialized registers
# New Ticket Created by Andy Dougherty # Please include the string: [perl #39013] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=39013 > I've found two more tests that were relying on uninitialized registers being set to zero. I'm not sure if this is what the author of those tests intended, or if the wrong registers were used in the sub statement, but this at least lets these tests pass consistently for me. --- parrot-current/t/op/jitn.t Sat Feb 25 00:32:39 2006 +++ parrot-andy/t/op/jitn.t Thu Apr 27 15:25:01 2006 @@ -183,6 +183,7 @@ set N2,2 set N3,3 set N4,4 +set N5,0 set N0,N1 set N2,N3 set N0,N1 @@ -255,6 +256,7 @@ set N2,2 set N3,3 set N4,4 +set N6,0 set N0,N1 set N2,N3 set N0,N1 -- Andy Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MSWin32 (Visual C++ 8.0) Test Results (r12442)
On 4/27/06, Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 27 Apr 2006, jerry gay wrote: > > > On 4/27/06, Ron Blaschke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Here's another round of test results on my box. I've also added the > > > details for the tests that failed. The C and > > > are not unexpected on Windows. > > > > > > > > Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed > > > --- > > > t/doc/pod.t3 768 11663 0.26% 24 738 820 > > fixed, r12443. > > > > > t/op/calling.t 1 256921 1.09% 91 > > > t/pmc/complex.t1 256531 1.89% 33 > > > t/pmc/env.t2 512122 16.67% 9-10 > > > t/pmc/objects.t1 256731 1.37% 73 > > > these are all expected, at the moment. > > They are? Is the list of "expected failuers" anywhere obvious? I don't > see it anywhere obvious either in the source or in the recent > perl6-internals archives. Perhaps I've missed it somewhere. > ron has reported failing env (#37301) and complex tests before (recent list mail,) and they appear regularly on the smoke server (http://smoke.parrotcode.org/smoke). calling is failing due to a test checked in by patrick (:flat and named params, iirc,) and objects is failing due to an as-yet-unimplemented opcode (part of PDD21 changes, iirc.) both of these should be resolved when leo (or any other C coder with tuits) up to fixing them. i'm having trouble finding tickets for these others, but that may be because my network connection is horribly inconsistent at the moment, and not because they don't exist. ~jerry
Re: MSWin32 (Visual C++ 8.0) Test Results (r12442)
On 4/27/06, Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 27 Apr 2006, jerry gay wrote: > > > On 4/27/06, Ron Blaschke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Here's another round of test results on my box. I've also added the > > > details for the tests that failed. The C and > > > are not unexpected on Windows. > > > > > > > > Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed > > > --- > > > t/doc/pod.t3 768 11663 0.26% 24 738 820 > > fixed, r12443. > > > > > t/op/calling.t 1 256921 1.09% 91 > > > t/pmc/complex.t1 256531 1.89% 33 > > > t/pmc/env.t2 512122 16.67% 9-10 > > > t/pmc/objects.t1 256731 1.37% 73 > > > these are all expected, at the moment. > > They are? Is the list of "expected failuers" anywhere obvious? I don't > see it anywhere obvious either in the source or in the recent > perl6-internals archives. Perhaps I've missed it somewhere. > ron has reported failing env (#37301) and complex tests before (recent list mail,) and they appear regularly on the smoke server (http://smoke.parrotcode.org/smoke). calling is failing due to a test checked in by patrick (:flat and named params, iirc,) and objects is failing due to an as-yet-unimplemented opcode (part of PDD21 changes, iirc.) both of these should be resolved when leo (or any other C coder with tuits) up to fixing them. i'm having trouble finding tickets for these others, but that may be because my network connection is horribly inconsistent at the moment, and not because they don't exist. ~jerry
[svn:parrot-pdd] r12452 - in trunk: . docs/pdds/clip
Author: allison Date: Thu Apr 27 14:20:59 2006 New Revision: 12452 Modified: trunk/docs/pdds/clip/pdd22_io.pod trunk/docs/pdds/clip/pdd23_exceptions.pod trunk/docs/pdds/clip/pdd24_events.pod trunk/docs/pdds/clip/pdd25_threads.pod Changes in other areas also in this revision: Modified: trunk/ (props changed) Log: Fixing headers in draft PDDs. Modified: trunk/docs/pdds/clip/pdd22_io.pod == --- trunk/docs/pdds/clip/pdd22_io.pod (original) +++ trunk/docs/pdds/clip/pdd22_io.pod Thu Apr 27 14:20:59 2006 @@ -1,9 +1,9 @@ # Copyright: 2001-2006 The Perl Foundation. -# $Id $ +# $Id: $ =head1 NAME -docs/pdds/pddXX_io.pod - Parrot I/O +docs/pdds/pdd22_io.pod - Parrot I/O =head1 ABSTRACT @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ =head1 VERSION -$Revision $ +$Revision: $ =head1 SYNOPSIS Modified: trunk/docs/pdds/clip/pdd23_exceptions.pod == --- trunk/docs/pdds/clip/pdd23_exceptions.pod (original) +++ trunk/docs/pdds/clip/pdd23_exceptions.pod Thu Apr 27 14:20:59 2006 @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ =head1 NAME -docs/pdds/clip/pddXX_exceptions.pod - Parrot Exceptions +docs/pdds/clip/pdd23_exceptions.pod - Parrot Exceptions =head1 ABSTRACT Modified: trunk/docs/pdds/clip/pdd24_events.pod == --- trunk/docs/pdds/clip/pdd24_events.pod (original) +++ trunk/docs/pdds/clip/pdd24_events.pod Thu Apr 27 14:20:59 2006 @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ =head1 NAME -docs/pdds/clip/pddXX_events.pod - Parrot Events +docs/pdds/clip/pdd24_events.pod - Parrot Events =head1 ABSTRACT Modified: trunk/docs/pdds/clip/pdd25_threads.pod == --- trunk/docs/pdds/clip/pdd25_threads.pod (original) +++ trunk/docs/pdds/clip/pdd25_threads.pod Thu Apr 27 14:20:59 2006 @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ =head1 NAME -docs/pdds/clip/pddXX_threads.pod - Parrot Threads +docs/pdds/clip/pdd25_threads.pod - Parrot Threads =head1 ABSTRACT
Re: MSWin32 (Visual C++ 8.0) Test Results (r12442)
On Thursday 27 April 2006 13:18, jerry gay wrote: > calling is failing due to a test checked in by patrick (:flat and > named params, iirc,) and objects is failing due to an > as-yet-unimplemented opcode (part of PDD21 changes, iirc.) both of > these should be resolved when leo (or any other C coder with tuits) up > to fixing them. These at least sound like TODOs. Oh mythical lurkers with some free time who want to contribute, there are a few of us who don't have time to code today but who do have time to apply good patches -- c
