> Does this bug still occur?
Given that nothing changed in stable: I must suspect so, yes.
I cannot reproduce it, though.
Leslie
___
elephant-devel site list
elephant-devel@common-lisp.net
http://common-lisp.net/mailman/listinfo/elephant-devel
Does this bug still occur?
On May 6, 2008, at 7:18 AM, Leslie P. Polzer wrote:
Do you mean in an index? A slot can have nil as a value and being
nil
is different than being unbound. Same thing is true with slot
indices. An unbound slot produces no index key, a nil slot
produces a
nil
> I assume this is not the new branch?
Correct.
> Could it be a bug due to the behavior of delete-pobj?
Well possible. I used it (i.e. DROP-POBJECT or DROP-INSTANCES)
in the case described.
Leslie
___
elephant-devel site list
elephant-devel@commo
I assume this is not the new branch? Could it be a bug due to the
behavior of delete-pobj?
On May 6, 2008, at 7:18 AM, Leslie P. Polzer wrote:
Do you mean in an index? A slot can have nil as a value and being
nil
is different than being unbound. Same thing is true with slot
indices. A
> Do you mean in an index? A slot can have nil as a value and being nil
> is different than being unbound. Same thing is true with slot
> indices. An unbound slot produces no index key, a nil slot produces a
> nil index key.
It occured in the object index for a class; the OIDs of six objects
w
On May 6, 2008, at 4:15 AM, Leslie P. Polzer wrote:
OK, I have applied this patch.
Thanks! I wonder how NIL values can be mapped to an OID in any case...
Do you mean in an index? A slot can have nil as a value and being nil
is different than being unbound. Same thing is true with slo
> OK, I have applied this patch.
Thanks! I wonder how NIL values can be mapped to an OID in any case...
> I didn't run the tests. Ordinarily I do before accepting a patch, but
> I assume if this causes a problem we will catch it quickly in our
> current state.
It's a pretty trivial change.
>
OK, I have applied this patch.
I didn't run the tests. Ordinarily I do before accepting a patch, but
I assume if this causes a problem we will catch it quickly in our
current state.
Of course, please make sure you are all green before submitting a patch.
On Mon, 2008-05-05 at 14:07 +0200, Les
Now don't ask me how a NIL value gets mapped to an OID key in the
class index. It happened, and I wasn't able to remove those things
because of a bug in PM-INDEXED-BTREE. Diff:
--- old-elephant/src/db-postmodern/pm-indexed-btree.lisp2008-05-05
14:04:49.930108544 +0200
+++ new-elephant/src
