Pike-devel

pike-devel@lists.lysator.liu.se

1 participants
3045 discussions

pike under sanitizers
by Mike 23 Jan '20

23 Jan '20

hi all, I've compiled and run tests by clang with different sanitizers (address, memory, undefined). If somebody wants to get report(s) and fix let me know. Some of them are trivial and make sense. I'm already post announce on irc and sent mail to grubba@ without reply :) (mike)

1 0

Re: Image.PNG unable to find Gz
by Chris Angelico 31 Dec '19

31 Dec '19

On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 12:38 AM Tobias S. Josefowitz @ Pike developers forum <10353(a)lyskom.lysator.liu.se> wrote: > > >As of commit 1c31950, the Image.PNG module fails unless Gz has already > >been loaded. The PIKE_MODULE_IMPORT lines fail, and the module chooses > >to export nothing. > > > >Is there a way to force the Gz module to be loaded whenever Image.PNG > >gets loaded? > > Fixed on master by directly going for _Gz instead of Gz from > Image.PNG. Thank you! I was confused by the fact that the EXPORT lines seemed to match the IMPORT lines, but I guess they must have both been wrong. The fix works. ChrisA

1 0

Image.PNG unable to find Gz
by Chris Angelico 31 Dec '19

31 Dec '19

As of commit 1c31950, the Image.PNG module fails unless Gz has already been loaded. The PIKE_MODULE_IMPORT lines fail, and the module chooses to export nothing. rosuav@sikorsky:~/pike$ pike -e 'write("%d\n", sizeof(indices(Image.PNG)));' 0 But if the Gz module gets tagged first, it works: rosuav@sikorsky:~/pike$ pike -e 'Gz.crc32; write("%d\n", sizeof(indices(Image.PNG)));' 7 Is there a way to force the Gz module to be loaded whenever Image.PNG gets loaded? ChrisA

2 1

Immediate call_out takes 2ms
by Tomasz Jamroszczak 17 Dec '19

17 Dec '19

Hi. In Pike 7.8 calling call_out takes 0.002 ms. In Ubuntu's Pike v8.0 release 498 and in Opera's v8.0 release 610 it takes 2ms. Test program: int callouts_to_queue = 5; System.Time t = System.Time(); int before; void f() { exit(1, "this is not expected to run"); } void start() { before = t->usec_full; call_out(end, 0.0); } void end() { int delay = t->usec_full - before; werror("took %f ms\n", delay / 1000.0); exit(0); } int main() { for (int i = 0; i < callouts_to_queue; i++) call_out(f, 3.0); call_out(start, 0.0); return -1; } Is there a fix in younger version of Pike? Best Regards, Tomasz Jamroszczak

5 7

Crypto.MAC segmentation fault?
by Stephen R. van den Berg 03 Dec '19

03 Dec '19

FYI: $ pike Pike v8.1 release 13 running Hilfe v3.5 (Incremental Pike Frontend) > object x = Crypto.MAC()->State("secretp"); Segmentation fault It might be abuse of the API (I was trying to find an incantation to create a secret to be used for JWT generation), but a segfault would not be allowed. -- Stephen.

2 1

Segmentation fault pike 8.1
by Stephen R. van den Berg 05 Nov '19

05 Nov '19

This is in a heavy multithreaded application: Thread 1475 "pike" received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. [Switching to Thread 0x7ffff574c700 (LWP 14689)] ba_alloc (a=a@entry=0x55555575bf20 <object_allocator>) at /var/src/roxen/81pike/src/block_allocator.c:267 267 p->h.used++; (gdb) l 262 263 ptr = p->h.first; 264 PIKE_MEMPOOL_ALLOC(a, ptr, a->l.block_size); 265 PIKE_MEM_RW_RANGE(ptr, sizeof(struct ba_block_header)); 266 267 p->h.used++; 268 269 #ifdef PIKE_DEBUG 270 ba_check_ptr(a, a->alloc, ptr, NULL, __LINE__); 271 #endif (gdb) p p $1 = (struct ba_page *) 0x555555d298c0 (gdb) p *p $2 = {h = {first = 0x555555d35ae000, used = 681, flags = 0}} (gdb) p ptr $3 = (struct ba_block_header *) 0x555555d35ae000 (gdb) p *ptr Cannot access memory at address 0x555555d35ae000 (gdb) where #0 ba_alloc (a=a@entry=0x55555575bf20 <object_allocator>) at /var/src/roxen/81pike/src/block_allocator.c:267 #1 0x000055555560156f in alloc_object () at /var/src/roxen/81pike/src/object.c:135 #2 low_clone (p=0x5555557d2f70) at /var/src/roxen/81pike/src/object.c:135 #3 0x0000555555601ad2 in debug_clone_object (p=<optimized out>, args=args@entry=0) at /var/src/roxen/81pike/src/object.c:408 #4 0x000055555564b55c in f_mutex_trylock (args=1) at /var/src/roxen/81pike/src/threads.c:2333 #5 0x0000555555585a9c in low_mega_apply (type=<optimized out>, type@entry=APPLY_STACK, args=1, arg1=<optimized out>, arg1@entry=0x0, arg2=arg2@entry=0x0) at /var/src/roxen/81pike/src/apply_low.h:225 #6 0x000055555558624e in jump_opcode_F_CALL_FUNCTION () at /var/src/roxen/81pike/src/interpret_functions.h:2422 #7 0x00007ffff6a4c55c in ?? () #8 0x00007ffff574bd41 in ?? () #9 0x0000000000000001 in ?? () #10 0x00007fffffffe03e in ?? () #11 0x00007fffffffe03f in ?? () #12 0x00007ffff574c700 in ?? () #13 0x00005555559af8e0 in ?? () #14 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () Any ideas? I can still explore more structures, have the session still open. -- Stephen.

2 9

Re: debugger, status and suggestions sought
by Mateusz Krawczuk 03 Nov '19

03 Nov '19

I think having both LSP <https://microsoft.github.io/language-server-protocol/> and DAP <https://microsoft.github.io/debug-adapter-protocol/> implementations for Pike would be awsome, but I feel that this discussion is getting further away from it's main point. We've been talking about LSP for a little during the Conference. There is a huge interest in it and I think we should move the LSP discussion to another mailing thread to avoid mixing contexts. Having a Pike debug adapter would also be great, but since DAP is used for estabilishing communication between IDE and the debugger, we can't move on with it until we actually have a debugger. >From what I understand the greatest challenge now would be to reach the local variables. I've heard that long time ago, the language got some optimizations that makes retrieving local variable names very challenging. Is it true? If yes, how we can jump this through? I would be more than happy to help crossing-out the remaining TO-DOs, if I only could get some itroduction and clues.

5 25

Re: Opinions on safe index
by Peter Bortas 25 Oct '19

25 Oct '19

On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 3:42 PM Peter Bortas > "?." should be there for symmetry, but it will probably not be used. On second thought, no, "?." should not be a thing. Other than possibly to throw a compile error if you use it. -- Peter Bortas

1 0

Opinions on safe index
by Peter Bortas ＠ Pike developers forum 24 Oct '19

24 Oct '19

I'll bring this up during next weeks conferance, but this is a chance for everyone to chime in. Safe indexing is not documented. Possibly partially because it's not consistently implemented. The lexer says this: if(GOBBLE('-') ) /* safe index: ?-> or ?[] */ { if( GOBBLE( '>' ) ) /* ?-> */ return TOK_SAFE_INDEX; SKIPN(-1); /* Undo GOBBLE('-') above */ } /* Probably wanted: ?. for safe constant index ?[] for safe [] index They however conflict with valid ?: syntaxes. */ /* if( GOBBLE('.' ) ) */ /* return TOK_SAFE_INDEX; */ The question is, could we take the hit that "?." and "?[]" would trigger safe indexing and thus break those as valid if syntax? I'm having a hard time conjureing up even semi-good theoretical examples for their uses. There are no uses in Pike's own source. Having "?->" without "?[]" is awkward and so either we should probably take that hit, or we change the syntax for safe index completely and depricate "?->". "?." should be there for symmerty, but it will probably not be used. As an aside: the "?" if syntax is nor documented in the refdoc for control structures, so hopefully there isn't a lot of casual users of it.

1 0

Broken pipermail
by Tomasz Jamroszczak 16 Sep '19

16 Sep '19

There's no September on https://lists.lysator.liu.se/pipermail/pike-devel/. Best Regards, Tomasz Jamroszczak

1 0

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