[chuck-dev] Patches: compiler warnings and test programs

Ge Wang gewang at CS.Princeton.EDU
Tue Jul 12 01:12:45 EDT 2005


Thanks for the patches.  We have applied the larger one and also dealt 
with what we could find of the rest of the compiler warnings (-Wall). 
If you have v2 checked out, please update, make clean, and give it a try 
and see if things work, including on 64-bit systems.  Please email me any 
errors or warnings.

Thank you again for the patches.  We haven't applied the first one yet 
because we haven't finalized what <<<foo>>> should output exactly, or if 
there will be variants of <<< >>>.

Presently, <<<foo>>> prints the value of foo and its type.  <<<foo, 
bar>>> prints foo and bar without type.  So on for <<<>>> with more 
arguments.  Some issues are (1) should <<<foo>>> print the type? (2) 
should we make a new operator based on <<<>>> for printing foo to 
arbitrary file handles (stdout, stderr, files, etc.)?  We will likely 
bring back chucking to file handles (foo => stdout), so <<<>>> 
won't be the only option.  Thoughts?


On Sat, 3 Jul 2005, Rasmus Kaj wrote:

> Hi!  I've gone and got myself an amd64, and now chuck v2 doesn't seem
> to be 64-bit clean ...  Here's a small first step in an attempt to fix
> that:
> First, a tiny patch to allow for the new output from <<<foo>>> in the
> test programs (which now include the type of foo).  Or should the old
> output be restored instead?
> Then, a larger patch to fix miscellaneous compiler warnings (mainly
> printf format strings and order of member initialisers).  I've yet
> ignored warnings about unused variables ...
> -- 
> Rasmus Kaj --+-- rasmus at kaj.se --+-- http://www.stacken.kth.se/~kaj/
> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion

More information about the chuck-dev mailing list