Pike-devel

pike-devel@lists.lysator.liu.se

1 participants
3045 discussions

Re: GTK2 examples
by Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 04 Oct '07

04 Oct '07

It's missing lots of functionality. Mostly in the area of selecting the set of kanji to be quizzed on. But the basic stuff works.

1 0

GTK2 examples
by H. William Welliver III 04 Oct '07

04 Oct '07

I got a request the other day for some examples of using the GTK2 module that go beyond "hello world". I only have GTK(1) code; does anyone else have anything that might satisfy an intrepid developer? Bill

2 1

Snapshot tarballs and packaging/debian
by Magnus Holmgren, FR Ryd (Nu med m�l och syfte) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 03 Oct '07

03 Oct '07

I have a few questions relating to pike in Debian (as you may know, the previous maintainer has retired from Debian and orphaned his packages). I've figured out that one can get a fresh tarball from http://pike.ida.liu.se/generated/pikefarm/packages/7.6/latest. What's the difference between that and checking out from CVS and running "make source" (which is what I suspect Marek has done), if any? Is there any archive of such tarballs except for the official releases? How did the packaging/debian subdirectory originally come to be? Do you synchronize with the Debian package yourself or has Marek been sending you patches? I see that export.pike adds new records to packaging/debian/changelog. AFAICT, export.pike --tag first increments the build number (to an even number, typically), then tags, then increment the build number again, so that an even build number represents a known state of the source, whereas an odd build number can include any number of commits inbetween.

17 129

Re: Snapshot tarballs and packaging/debian
by Martin Nilsson (Opera Mini - AFK!) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 02 Oct '07

02 Oct '07

I don't think we've ever changed the API between x.even.y, but it of course happens in e.g. Pike 7.7.

4 3

Snapshot tarballs and packaging/debian
by Magnus Holmgren, exim.org ＠ Pike developers forum 01 Oct '07

01 Oct '07

Wait, there's http://pike.ida.liu.se/download/pub/pike/beta/. Neat. But there's no 7.7 there.

5 7

Snapshot tarballs and packaging/debian
by Johan Sundstr�m (Achtung Liebe!) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 01 Oct '07

01 Oct '07

Of course, this is a more practically useful URL, though (for 7.6): http://pike.ida.liu.se/_/cvsview/commits/7.6/src/version.h?u=Pike&f=2007-06… meaning that the 7.6.116 build was made from a CVS tree snapshot from 2007-06-03 22:35:36 UTC.

1 0

Re: debian packages of 7.6.112
by Magnus Holmgren, exim.org ＠ Pike developers forum 26 Sep '07

26 Sep '07

Er, wait. It's not in _/usr/lib_, which is why you use $LD_LIBRARY_PATH to point to it. I guess pike could set it somewhere...

1 0

Re: how to stop an iterator
by H. William Welliver III 26 Sep '07

26 Sep '07

> yeah, but next() is optional and not used by foreach There's no indication that next() is optional. At the very least, the documentation is somewhat lacking, if for no other reason than the api including two parallel sets of functions for interacting with the iterator, one of which is relatively more "standard" than the other without stating clearly which functions are actually used. I think most people who have used other languages with iterators will feel more comfortable with ->next() and friends, and be confused that they're not actually used. I know I was, and I'm probably not alone. > and += returns the iterator itself, so you can't return UNDEFINED > there. > since += never fails the only option is to test wether you still > have an > item there or not, and then ! is a good choice for that test. Well, you can very easily return undefined from `+=(), and it doesn't make any difference. That, at the very least, should have prompted an error, but instead, it kept right on running. I'm not sure that the semantics of this are appropriate, as the side effect is important (or should be, even if you're always supposed to return this_object() from `+=()). > it would be different if next() where the standard way of advancing > the > iterator. Well, it is the "standard" way, [by "standard", I mean the pattern employed by C++, Java, Objective-C, etc] Pike just happens to use operator overloading instead. Anyhow, my problem is solved. If I find time, I may update the documentation to be a little more clear about what's required and what's optional. Bill

2 1

how to stop an iterator
by H. William Welliver III 26 Sep '07

26 Sep '07

I'm writing an iterator and under 7.7.34 (at least), I can't seem to get a loop using it to end, even though next() and `+=() both return UNDEFINED at the end, but the foreach loop doesn't ever seem to end. Am I missing something? Bill

2 1

static variables with function scope
by Henrik Grubbstr�m (Lysator) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 18 Sep '07

18 Sep '07

Hi. Some of you may have noticed that I implemented static variables with function scope a day or two ago. Example: int inc() { static int counter; return counter++; } The problem in Pike is that the intended lifetime of the variable isn't always obvious; consider nested classes: class X { int inc() { static int counter; return counter++; } } int main() { function(:int) X1 = X()->inc; function(:int) X2 = X()->inc; write("X1:%O,%O\n" "X2:%O\n", X1(), X1(), X2()); } Should the above output X1:0,1 X2:0, or X1:0,1 X2:2? ie should the variable be stored in X or in the top-level class? Pike also has nested functions; consider: function(:int) X() { int inc() { static int counter; return counter++; }; return inc; } int main() { function(:int) X1 = X(); function(:int) X2 = X(); write("X1:%O,%O\n" "X2:%O\n", X1(), X1(), X2()); } Same question. I believe that the most useful would be to store the variable in the closest surrounding scope (ie X1:0,1 X2:0 for both of the above), and then have some extra syntax for specifying some other scope. The question is what the syntax should be? Any suggestions?

11 34

Jump to page:

2026

2025

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