Pike-devel

pike-devel@lists.lysator.liu.se

3041 discussions

Types
by Martin Nilsson (saturator) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 04 Dec '03

04 Dec '03

As an experiment I changed the type of stringp to tOr(tFunc(tStr,tInt1),tFunc(tNot(tStr),tInt0)) That does however cause compilation warnings that I think are wrong: Getopt.pmod:109: Warning: Calling non-function value. Getopt.pmod:109: Warning: Type called: function(string : int(1..1)) | function(!string : int(0..0))

2 2

C Autodocs
by Bill Welliver 04 Dec '03

04 Dec '03

I've run into what appears to be a limitation in the C autodoc extractor. The problem is that I want to have documentation in a module for a non-root module, such as System.PAM. Currently, that's not possible, and it failes with the following error: DocParser error: "@module: expected module name, got \" System.PAM\"" Tools.AutoDoc.DocParser.AutoDocError(SourcePosition(File: pam.cmod, lines: 60..60), "DocParser", "@module: expected module name, got \" System.PAM\"") Is there another way to do this, or does it require a change to the extractors? What would it take? I'm not familiar enough with the extractors to know where to begin (it looks some real monsters live in the code). If it were possible, would i still be able to add extra docs for the Pike portion? I don't think it would be as useful to have a little line about the pike module inheriting ___PAM or such. Any thoughts? Bill

2 2

More benchmarks
by Martin Nilsson (saturator) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 03 Dec '03

03 Dec '03

Ok, I guess we are closing in on making a 7.6 release. This is the current shootout benchmark status against some other similar languages. Java PHP Perl Pike Python Ruby TCL 1: 3.60 12.56 4.91 0.63 4.59 9.40 Failed (ackermann) 2: 1.68 11.91 4.76 1.40 3.06 8.61 15.19 (ary3) 3: 2.89 12.13 6.37 1.55 4.46 7.00 11.63 (fibo) 4: 7.94 5.98 5.72 4.69 3.83 18.67 7.75 (hash) 5: 1.48 8.62 3.47 1.09 2.48 6.30 8.33 (heapsort) 6: 5.46 Missing 3.19 2.70 4.73 2.44 27.44 (lists) 7: 2.17 Missing 5.90 1.83 4.76 3.38 Missing (methcall) 8: 7.27 Failed 17.91 0.91 13.95 35.87 34.39 (nestedloop) 9: 3.61 Missing 12.99 3.37 5.99 6.16 Missing (objinst) 10: 1.81 5.80 2.23 1.43 2.92 5.93 5.87 (random) 11: 6.57 Failed 12.19 4.52 9.16 18.39 50.59 (sieve) 12: 3.12 4.50 2.32 1.90 4.21 3.80 7.02 (strcat) I have altered the lists test to use arrays, as intended, and not strings (which lowers the time from 13.1 seconds to 2.7). The languages are gcj/gij 2.3 (the compilation time is included), PHP 4.3.4RC3, Perl 5.8.2, Pike 7.5.13, Python 2.3.2, Ruby 1.8.0 and TCL 8.3. In the year since last benchmark we can see some significant improvements in the Python performance, almost 50% in many tests (though it is still not possible to run ackermann(3,9) without running out of stack). Perl is also doing good with about 25% better since 5.8.0. From test 8 we can see that multipass strength reduction isn't implemented in any other language. On the whole it looks like Perl and Python is now only twice as slow as Pike, so we better watch out...

9 13

More benchmarks
by Niels M�ller (igelkottsr�ddare) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 03 Dec '03

03 Dec '03

And in English: It might be relevant to also have figures without the compilation time, for Java and other languages where one can choose to do some or all of the compilation work separately.

1 0

Process.create_process() and rlimits
by Bill Welliver 01 Dec '03

01 Dec '03

This message includes a little background, so please read on... I've been beating my head against a wall for the past two days trying to figure out why a perl CGI wasn't running. It turns out that it was being killed automatically by the process creator (Process.create_process) in the CGI module. Despite giving it quite generous (basically unlimited) limits, it was still being stomped on. I commented out the following code (options is passed to Process.create_process): if(limits) options->rlimit=limits; And now everything is working as it should. I don't know what the problem might be, but it was a simple perl script (I pared it down to test), and the line that seemed to make the difference between working and not was: use Sybase::CTLib; First, I think something's funny with the limits support if this simple program was getting killed. Second, has anyone else had similar problems? The rlimit in question looks like this: "rlimit":([ /* 3 elements */ "core":0, "cpu":60, "nofile":64 ]) This program runs in about 1 second from the command line. Also, FWIW, this problem is present in Caudium 1.2 (pike 7.2) and 1.3 (7.4). Any thoughts? Bill

2 1

System.PAM module
by Bill Welliver 01 Dec '03

01 Dec '03

I put together a glue to the Pluggable Authentication Modules framework over the weekend. I've made it available to anyone who'd like to test it at the following address: ftp://ftp.riverweb.com/pub/hww3/pike_modules/System_PAM-1.0.tar.gz This requires a relatively recent version of Pike 7.5, ie .12 or .13 should be fine. The module is documented, though the autodoc extraction for C modules isn't currently working properly. Look at pam.cmod for the raw autodocs. If you're familiar with PAM, you shouldn't have any problems using this, and there are a few examples included. I'd also be interested to hear of any design improvement type suggestions that might be floating out there, as this is my first "real" C module. I've built this module on Solaris and Linux, and have tested it under Solaris. I've tested it with dmalloc, so it shouldn't have any built in memory leaks during normal operation, but I've noticed the Solaris PAM implimentation seems to leak regardless depending on your authentication configuration (eg LDAP). Bill

2 1

module documentation
by Bill Welliver 30 Nov '03

30 Nov '03

I've run into a problem with building module documentation outside the pike tree: when a documentation build directory is within the documentation source directory, you end up with a recursion loop. this is because extract_autodoc creates a parallel tree inside of the documentation build directory, and once the extractor descends into the documentation build directory, it never reaches the end of the directories to recurse. The problem came up because autodoc markup is not extracted from C/CMOD source files using the new extract targets. I wanted to add this, but ran into the problem above. As far as I can see, there are 3 avenues: 1. build documentation outside of the documentation source directory (ie the module build directory) i don't think that this is a very good option, as it only masks the problem. 2. add a check in extract_autodoc.pike to check for the problem and stop recursing into the documentation build directory this stops the problem above, but seems to create a problem with duplicate documentation for the module in question (it ends with an error to this effect). 3. add a separate target that will extract documentation for files specified in the makefile, as say AUTODOC_C_INPUT or something, then extract the pike autodoc as normal. this would require extract_autodoc to be modified to be able to extract from a source file, rather than a directory. Anyone have any constructive thoughts about the problem in general and a solution to it? Bill

1 0

Checking threads on ppc
by Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS ＠ Pike developers forum 25 Nov '03

25 Nov '03

When ppc machine code is used, this program won't terminate: int do_work = 1, rounds; void work() { while (do_work) { rounds++; } } int main() { for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) Thread.thread_create (work); sleep (10); do_work = 0; sleep (1); werror ("rounds: %d\n", rounds); } The reason is that it uses OPCODE_INLINE_BRANCH and doesn't generate the appropriate calls to check_threads_etc() on backward jumps after branch opcodes. (Normally the opcodes do that themselves since they have the address to jump to.)

2 3

Re: A bug(?) in lfun::`[]() handling
by Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 25 Nov '03

25 Nov '03

> I want to parse something (from specific subset) that specified inside of > [], and pass control to default `[]() operator when this something doesn't > fit to specific rules. But you can't pass something to the default [] operator which doesn't fit to the rules of the default [] operator. So it's your code which is faulty. > But I wonder why `->() was called... It shouldn't be there (at least I see > no reason why it should). The default [] implementation uses the -> implementation to save code duplication, since they have the same semantics (on objects). / Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) Previous text: >2003-11-25 21:31: >Subject: Re: A bug(?) in lfun::`[]() handling >-------------------------------------------------------------------- >On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 09:05:03PM +0100, Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) @ Pike (-) developers forum wrote: > >> there, although I'm not sure what. What semantics did you intend for >> your [] operator? > > I want to parse something (from specific subset) that specified inside of > [], and pass control to default `[]() operator when this something doesn't > fit to specific rules. > > But I wonder why `->() was called... It shouldn't be there (at least I see > no reason why it should). > >Regards, >/Al > > > / Brevbäraren >

1 0

A bug(?) in lfun::`[]() handling
by Alexander Demenshin 25 Nov '03

25 Nov '03

Hi, Doing some experiments (Pike 7.4.28)... So: ---snip--- class Parent { mixed `[](mixed ... args) { Stdio.stderr->write("Called `[](%O) in %O: %O\n", args, this, ::`[](@args)); return ::`[](@args); } } class Child { inherit Parent; } int main(int argc, array(string)argv) { Child obj = Child(); mixed val; val = obj[-1..1]; // Just in case - optimizer will cut the code when "val =" is removed. } ---snip--- The attempt to execute gives: Bad argument 1 to ::->(). Expected string Unknown program: ::->(-1,1) object.c:2105: object.c:2105()->()(-1,1) inh2.pike:5: inh2()->Child()->](-1,1) inh2.pike:20: inh2()->main(1,({"/home/aldem/src/pike/inh2.pike"})) I don't have any definition of `->() nor any references to it... And no references in docs that `->() and `[]() are equivalent... In fact, inheritance doesn't matter - it is just my standard template for test cases... Substitute Child to Parent and the error will be exactly the same. Not sure if problem exists with 7.5 or 7.4-cvs version - didn't check it out (yet)... Regards, /Al

2 1

Jump to page:

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