Pike-devel November 2013

pike-devel@lists.lysator.liu.se

3 participants
10 discussions

debugger opcodes
by Bill Welliver 30 Oct '14

30 Oct '14

I noticed that folks have been working on code generation lately. Any chance it might be possible to implement some of the opcodes required to get debugging working (step, break, etc)? I seem to recall someone indicating it wasn't a terribly difficult task, but it's clearly beyond my understanding of the problem. Bill

4 6

Sql.pgsql behavior in case of errors
by aldem-pikedev＠aldem.net 21 Aug '14

21 Aug '14

Hi everyone, I am preparing to use Postgres in my app, found the following strange behavior: ---snip--- Sql.Sql db = Sql.Sql("pgsql://localhost", "test", "test", "test"); db->query("BEGIN"); db->query("INSERT INTO requests (SvTrId) VALUES ('lala')"); catch(db->query("INSERT INTO requests (SvTrId) VALUES ('lala')")); db->query("INSERT INTO requests (SvTrId) VALUES ('juju')"); db->query("ROLLBACK"); ---snip--- Database is opened, row with 'lala' is inserted, second query (obviously) fails as SvTrId is the primary key, but row with 'juju' is inserted *and* appears in the database - i.e. the transaction is *committed*! Studying source code show, that once error is encounter, session is reset, i.e. running transaction is rolled back, everything is closed, temporary tables are deleted and session variables are reset as well, and after that, the next statement(s) will be committed immediately, as there is no active transaction. In my opinion, this is not exactly correct behavior when statement fails, as session still may be needed (especially temporary tables, open cursors etc). Im some cases, this is perfectly normal when SQL statement fails, especially in SERIALIZED transaction isolation level, and it would be more practical to leave the decision as of what to do to the application. Yes, this is true that it is impossible to continue executing statements in failed transaction, but temporary tables etc. may still be needed. Also, silent reconnection is not a good idea too - when there are many transactional statements are executed - it would be nice to have an option to modify this behavior. Best regards, /Alexander

5 6

Cryptography update
by Martin Nilsson (Opera Mini - AFK!) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 22 Nov '13

22 Nov '13

A small progress report update on the cryptographic developments. It is now possible to generate and validate certificates signed with DSA SHA1/SHA224/SHA256 and RSA MD2/MD5/SHA1/SHA256/SHA384/SHA512. I've successfully verified openssl certificates with the X509 module, and as a system test I've set up a TLS webserver with DSA certificate and had wget (using openssl) download from it. Besides the key generation, I feel that this part of the code is now in good shape.

1 0

Top links in documentation looks broken
by Tor Edvardsson ＠ Pike developers forum 18 Nov '13

18 Nov '13

The top liknks in the documentation looks really broken. The links have line breaks so its just messed thinks up. Best would be to scrap the table layout and just have a ul-list for it.

1 0

Re: Pike 8 @ Pike conf 2013
by Chris Angelico 17 Nov '13

17 Nov '13

On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 12:25 AM, Henrik Grubbström (Lysator) @ Pike (-) developers forum <10353(a)lyskom.lysator.liu.se> wrote: >>On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 11:40 PM, Henrik Grubbström (Lysator) @ Pike >>(-) developers forum <10353(a)lyskom.lysator.liu.se> wrote: >>>>This looks like a good opportunity to mention a few patches that I >>>>haven't heard back regarding. They're mostly fairly trivial/simple. Is >>>>there a better way to suggest patches than posting them to this list >>>>or pike@roxen? >>> >>> Either works. >>> >>> Applied all of them except for the low_read_file() patch, >>> which I fail to see a reason for. >> >>Thanks! >> >>That was to cure a compiler warning using gcc on OS/2, if I recall >>correctly. Not a big deal, was just a "try to make sure things are >>safe" check. Unlikely - if even possible - to make a difference on any >>actually-supported platform. > > The PRINTPIKEOFFT stuff is intended to fix such warnings. A problem > with the patch was that it wasn't 64-bit clean, and as it is just a > fatal diagnostic I don't see any reason to change it. Fair enough! I'll discard the patch. Woot! That means I'm now running a clean 8.0! ChrisA

1 0

Re: Pike 8 @ Pike conf 2013
by Chris Angelico 17 Nov '13

17 Nov '13

On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 11:40 PM, Henrik Grubbström (Lysator) @ Pike (-) developers forum <10353(a)lyskom.lysator.liu.se> wrote: >>This looks like a good opportunity to mention a few patches that I >>haven't heard back regarding. They're mostly fairly trivial/simple. Is >>there a better way to suggest patches than posting them to this list >>or pike@roxen? > > Either works. > > Applied all of them except for the low_read_file() patch, > which I fail to see a reason for. Thanks! That was to cure a compiler warning using gcc on OS/2, if I recall correctly. Not a big deal, was just a "try to make sure things are safe" check. Unlikely - if even possible - to make a difference on any actually-supported platform. ChrisA

2 1

Re: Pike 8 @ Pike conf 2013
by Chris Angelico 17 Nov '13

17 Nov '13

On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 2:15 AM, Henrik Grubbström (Lysator) @ Pike (-) developers forum <10353(a)lyskom.lysator.liu.se> wrote: > And now the branch and Pike 8.0.1 exist: > > | Pike v8.0 release 1 running Hilfe v3.5 (Incremental Pike Frontend) > | > Cool! This looks like a good opportunity to mention a few patches that I haven't heard back regarding. They're mostly fairly trivial/simple. Is there a better way to suggest patches than posting them to this list or pike@roxen? ChrisA

2 1

Pike 8 @ Pike conf 2013
by Henrik Grubbstr�m (Lysator) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 16 Nov '13

16 Nov '13

>Consolidated notes from the Pike conference regarding Pike 8. > > Pike 8 branch > ------------- > [/] Update the CHANGES file. > [ ] Make the branch. [...] >As far as I can see, there are no blockers left for making the branch. > >If nobody protests, I'll make the branch later today. And now the branch and Pike 8.0.1 exist: | Pike v8.0 release 1 running Hilfe v3.5 (Incremental Pike Frontend) | >

2 1

PollBackend on OSX
by H. William Welliver III 07 Nov '13

07 Nov '13

I've been playing around with the newest commits to 7.9, in particular a change made that should allow PollDeviceBackend and PollBackend to co-exist. Specifically, I'm trying to get things to compile on OSX, and while I think I've accomplished that goal, it doesn't appear that the resulting PollBackend works (at least all of the tests fail). I seem to remember that being true on OSX, as poll isn't really fully functional. Can anyone confirm that? I don't see any point in committing my my fixes to get both working if the result is non-functional (in which case I'll commit a fix that disables poll on OSX). Bill

2 2

7.9 segfault on 32-bit Darwin
by H. William Welliver III 03 Nov '13

03 Nov '13

Looks like this is the commit that causes 32-bit Pike on Darwin to segfault: commit 20fe37f6c62730993beb1c426c733cb98e12cb44 IA32: Use OPCODE_INLINE_RETURN when compiling with gcc. I've confirmed the problem on OSX 10.7 and 10.8 using gcc-4.2 (supplied by apple). Since machine code currently is a little above my ability to resolve, I'll just leave this as a bug report. Bill

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

Pike-devel November 2013