Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 5:16 PM -0700 2/26/04, Luke Palmer wrote:
And how do we deal with an object already in existence when the base
object gets an attribute added?
After that, we post a notification to all child classes and walk through
the PMC pools inserting the new attribute in the proper spo
At 5:16 PM -0700 2/26/04, Luke Palmer wrote:
Dan Sugalski writes:
At 2:38 PM +0100 2/26/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>Simplifies compilers:
>
>newclass P1, "Foo"
>addattribute P1, "i"
>findclass I1, "Foo"
>new P2, I1
>
>classoffset I2, P2
>
>In static cases, where P2 is
At 8:10 AM +0100 2/26/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
At 4:54 PM -0500 2/25/04, Simon Glover wrote:
If I'm understanding the docs correctly, this should print '0'.
Instead, it prints 'Array index out of bounds!'
Another bug, though the offset ought to be 2
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 8:10 AM +0100 2/26/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>>
>>*Please* don't. C (and attribute access) should by all
>>means start with 0.
> Why?
Simplifies compilers:
newclass P1, "Foo"
addattribute P1, "i"
findclass I1, "Foo"
new P2, I1
cl
At 2:38 PM +0100 2/26/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
At 8:10 AM +0100 2/26/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
*Please* don't. C (and attribute access) should by all
means start with 0.
Why?
Simplifies compilers:
newclass P1, "Foo"
addattribute P1, "i"
fin
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 2:38 PM +0100 2/26/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> >Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> At 8:10 AM +0100 2/26/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> >>>
> >>>*Please* don't. C (and attribute access) should by all
> >>>means start with 0.
> >
> >> Why?
>
At 10:03 AM -0500 2/26/04, Simon Glover wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 2:38 PM +0100 2/26/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> At 8:10 AM +0100 2/26/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
\> > > No, it won't. No code should ever assume an absolute o
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 10:03 AM -0500 2/26/04, Simon Glover wrote:
> >On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> >
> >> >like t/pmc/objects.t?
> >>
> >> I was waiting for you to pull that out. :) Yes, objects.t assumes
> >> some evil low-level knowledge of the internals.
Dan Sugalski writes:
> At 2:38 PM +0100 2/26/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> >Simplifies compilers:
> >
> >newclass P1, "Foo"
> >addattribute P1, "i"
> >findclass I1, "Foo"
> >new P2, I1
> >
> >classoffset I2, P2
> >
> >In static cases, where P2 is known to be a C, attrib #0 ("i")
Leopold Toetsch writes:
> Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > At 4:54 PM -0500 2/25/04, Simon Glover wrote:
> >> If I'm understanding the docs correctly, this should print '0'.
> >> Instead, it prints 'Array index out of bounds!'
>
> > Another bug, though the offset ought to be 2 right n
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 4:54 PM -0500 2/25/04, Simon Glover wrote:
>> If I'm understanding the docs correctly, this should print '0'.
>> Instead, it prints 'Array index out of bounds!'
> Another bug, though the offset ought to be 2 right now. (Attributes 0
> and 1 are taken
At 6:42 PM -0500 2/25/04, Simon Glover wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2004, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 4:54 PM -0500 2/25/04, Simon Glover wrote:
> If I'm understanding the docs correctly, this should print '0'.
> Instead, it prints 'Array index out of bounds!'
Another bug, though the offset ought to be
On Wed, 25 Feb 2004, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 4:54 PM -0500 2/25/04, Simon Glover wrote:
> > If I'm understanding the docs correctly, this should print '0'.
> > Instead, it prints 'Array index out of bounds!'
>
> Another bug, though the offset ought to be 2 right now. (Attributes 0
> and 1 are
At 4:54 PM -0500 2/25/04, Simon Glover wrote:
If I'm understanding the docs correctly, this should print '0'.
Instead, it prints 'Array index out of bounds!'
Another bug, though the offset ought to be 2 right now. (Attributes 0
and 1 are taken by other things so they're valid)
--
If I'm understanding the docs correctly, this should print '0'.
Instead, it prints 'Array index out of bounds!'
newclass P1, "Foo"
addattribute P1, "i"
find_type I0, "Foo"
new P2, I0
classoffset I1, P2, "Foo"
print I1
print "\n"
end
Simon
15 matches
Mail list logo
