Pike-devel

pike-devel@lists.lysator.liu.se

3044 discussions

Wrong optimization? [again time()]
by Alexander Demenshin 30 Mar '03

30 Mar '03

Hi there, Just found another bug(?) - the construction like: int ts = time() + 10; while (time() < ts) /* nothing */ ; is wrongly optimized - it doesn't work as expected, i.e. the loop is bypassed - so virtually there is no delay. When I change it to 'while ((n = time()) < ts);' or put something in body, it works. Checked against one day old CVS Pike 7.4 (7.4.17). NB: Is it related to time() only or? :) Regards, /Al

1 0

args
by Mirar ＠ Pike developers forum 30 Mar '03

30 Mar '03

What's up with the command line argument parser? | orchid% pike -M ~/pike/lib/modules -D FOO=17 -e 'werror("%O\n",FOO)'; echo | Pike: Couldn't find script to execute | ("/home/mirar/pike/longlongint/FOO=17") | orchid% pike -M ~/pike/lib/modules -DFOO=17 -e 'werror("%O\n",FOO)'; echo | -:3:Undefined identifier "FOO". | Compilation failed.

2 5

array_adapter.h
by Mirar ＠ Pike developers forum 30 Mar '03

30 Mar '03

Temporary fault = checkin miss or am I missing something? make[3]: *** No rule to make target `[...]/src/post_modules/_ADT/array_adapter.h', needed by `adt.o'. Stop. make[3]: Leaving directory `[...]/post_modules/_ADT'

2 2

configure
by Martin Nilsson (har bott i google) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 28 Mar '03

28 Mar '03

configure.in in _math says AC_CHECK_HEADERS(ieeefp.h fp_class.h floatingpoint.h) and later does #ifdef HAVE_FP_CLASS_H #include <fpclass.h> #endif in the test for HAVE_WORKING_FPSETMASK. HAVE_FP_CLASS_H is not used at all in math.c. There is at least one thing wrong here, right?

2 1

full MySQL 4.x support. or pike roadmap
by thomas.gusenleitner＠com-bet.com ＠ Pike developers forum 27 Mar '03

27 Mar '03

HI to all! mysql 4.x support works only with a mysql CFLAGS=-DUSE_OLD_FUNCTIONS is this correct ? are there plans to make a full 4.x support ? bye, thomas

3 3

%-8F
by Mirar ＠ Pike developers forum 27 Mar '03

27 Mar '03

Is it a conscious choice that %F doesn't honor the minus flag? | > sscanf("\0\0\0\0\x29\xf0\x3c\x41","%8F",x),x; | Result: 0.000000 | > sscanf("\0\0\0\0\x29\xf0\x3c\x41","%-8F",x),x; | Result: 0.000000 | > sscanf(reverse("\0\0\0\0\x29\xf0\x3c\x41"),"%8F",x),x; | Result: 1896489.000000 | > sprintf("%8F",1896489.0); | Result: "A<ð)\0\0\0\0" | > sprintf("%-8F",1896489.0); | Result: "A<ð)\0\0\0\0" It makes it a bit unnecessary difficult to read binary floats produced by Intel machines.

2 1

SDL-fel
by Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 25 Mar '03

25 Mar '03

Ah, never mind, I remembered that I have an account on aphrael, so I can check it out myself... :-)

2 5

SDL-fel
by Peter Bortas ＠ Pike developers forum 24 Mar '03

24 Mar '03

The problem with the SDL module is that the configure test doesn't find _main. I don't know why yet, but I have removed the kludge. configure:1069: checking for SDL - version >= 1.2.0 configure:1190: /mnt/aphraelraid/home/peter/hack/Pike/7.4/build/windows_xp-5.1.2600-x86/smartlink rntcl -o conftest -I/usr/local/include -I/usr/X11R6/include -R/usr/local/lib -L/usr/local/lib -R/usr/X11R6/lib -L/usr/X11R6/lib conftest.c -lshell32 -lkernel32 -lws2_32 -ladvapi32 -lm -lsdl 1>&5 LIBCMT.lib(crt0.obj) : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol _main conftest.exe : fatal error LNK1120: 1 unresolved externals CL returned error code 2.

3 8

for-loop optimization
by Marcus Agehall (Tr�dl�s) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 21 Mar '03

21 Mar '03

I just wrote a for-loop like this: string foo="gazonk"; for(int i=0;i<sizeof(foo);i++) { ... do stuff ... if (sometimes) foo = foo[1..]; ... do stuff ... } The problem I discoverd was that when the length of foo is changed, the loop still tries to loop over the original length of foo. The problem dissappeard when I replace sizeof(foo) with a variable and update it when changing the length of foo. Is this the correct behaviour or is the optimizer doing more than it should here?

6 15

reasons why pike is better than python?
by Martin Baehr 21 Mar '03

21 Mar '03

hi, someone posted this url: http://trific.ath.cx/resources/python/optimization/ in roxenchat with the comment that pike should have similar comments to help people optimize their code. to me this page much more reads like a list of reasons not to use pike. could someone please assert that pike doesn't have issues like these? of course some optimization suggestions pointing out what things are in fact slow would be nice too. greetings, martin.

16 92

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