When is it correct that something that was an efun on encode shouldn't be one at decode? Maybe your problem is in the codec instead?
/ Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS
Previous text:
2004-07-03 02:43: Subject: Warnings from startup script
I just checked in a patch to Pike to get rid of that silly "Expected efun constan" in the logfile. The patch works, I'm just wondering if the patch doesn't have any other unexpected side-effects.
The loading is so much faster now, the memory usage is down, the logfiles are clean(er).
/ Stephen R. van den Berg
I think it might be the notion of "efun" that has become contaminated.
Pike v7.4 release 44 running Hilfe v3.5 (Incremental Pike Frontend)
add_constant("blutt", lambda() { return 7; });
(1) Result: 0
blutt();
(2) Result: 7
Is blutt() an efun? It certainly isn't a FUNCTION_BUILTIN.
/ Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!)
Previous text:
2004-07-03 11:20: Subject: Warnings from startup script
When is it correct that something that was an efun on encode shouldn't be one at decode? Maybe your problem is in the codec instead?
/ Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS
When werror is replaced with another werror.
/ Martin Nilsson (räfsfiskal)
Previous text:
2004-07-03 11:20: Subject: Warnings from startup script
When is it correct that something that was an efun on encode shouldn't be one at decode? Maybe your problem is in the codec instead?
/ Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS
pike-devel@lists.lysator.liu.se
-
Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum -
Martin Nilsson (r�fsfiskal) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum
-
Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS ＠ Pike developers forum
-
Per Hedbor () ＠ Pike (-) developers forum