Mail #9146

Back to main page of archive

Previous mail   Next mail   Unformatted/full headers
Overview  10 days   Subject   Date   Thread   Author  

From: Mirsad Todorovac
Subject: range check test programs
Date: 4 Aug 2003, 14:20:38

On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, Frank Heckenbach wrote:

> Mirsad Todorovac wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 31 Jul 2003, Frank Heckenbach wrote:
> >
> > > Mirsad Todorovac wrote:
> > >
> > > >     http://www.alu.hr/~mtodorov/rngv0.04.tar.gz/mir043[ceil][lu].pas
> > >
> > > 403
> > >
> > > BTW, I'd prefer it you send such files by email attachment (either
> > > privately or to the list, if anyone else cares at all). I usually
> > > terminate my internet connection after downloading my mail, and if I
> > > have to get a HTTP file, I have to connect again. Thanks.
> >
> > Sorry to have wasted your resources, I haven't realized you do not have
> > a permanent connection. I'm sending in attachment now.
> >
> > (The link above wasn't actually a real link, but a scheme.)
>
> I know, but `http://www.alu.hr/~mtodorov/rngv0.04.tar.gz' was 403.

You're right: it came to me just after I've pressed "Send" that /pascal/
is missing between ~mtodorov/ and /rngv0.04.tar.gz

My error. Please accept apology.

> > > Ah, no. The tag must be constant according to EP, so this actually
> > > isn't a case for runtime range-checking, so we can forget about
> > > variant records here. (Variant records are special in this regard --
> > > I suppose that's to simplify work for compilers that allocate memory
> > > based on the actual tag value.)
> >
> > Then we drop mir040[ab].pas, I guess?
>
> Yes.

Good.

> > The case with constant seems to be already detected at compile time with
> > my present compiler (20030507). If we need a WRONG test that would keep
> > this verified, it's not a problem to fix that.
>
> I think we have such a test. (I'd have to check -- if you feel
> urged, you can write (another?) one, but I think it's not really
> necessary.)
>
> > > > > > > Initialization of types, variables and typed constants. (I.e.,
> > > > > > > variables (or fields) or subrange type with an out-of-range
> > > > > > > initializer; must be locally, otherwise GPC won't accept
> > > > > > > non-constants initializers.)
> > > >
> > > > Done. mir041[ceil][ul].pas
> > >
> > > These are for variables. Please add a few (not all combinations) for
> > > constants and type intializers.
> >
> > Err, I tried but I've got something illegal. I think I'll need an example
> > or two on these. (!!!)
>
> I think constants require compile-time constants, so forget about
> them. Types (`type Foo = Bar value Baz') should be relevant, though.
> (You might have to declare a variable of the initialized type in
> order to provoke the range-check error.)
>
> > Just curious, Val returned 2 and 17 in ec after these two tests
> > respective. Is that OK?
> >
> >    Val ('invalid', k, ec);
> >    Val ('123456789012345invalid', k, ec);
>
> No. It will be fixed in the next release. (fjf909.pas)

Excellent.

> > > > Q: What is the legal range for 3rd parm of Val?
> > >
> > > It gives 0 for success and the position of the first invalid
> > > character otherwise.
> >
> > Done: mir034[cd].pas
>
> These were for the 2nd parameter.
>
> Still missing now:
>
> - Val 3rd parameter

It's in mir034[cd].pas - I believe they should be in last attachment.
I may have forgotten to mention.

> - Pack, Unpack more strictly
>
> - Type initializers
>
> - `asm' target (IA32 specific suffices)

I recall you said Pack, Unpack have some additional possibilities.
Type initializers are a news for me.
But I think I'll manage.

> BTW, some tests do "too much", but I'll leave it at that now. (Hope
> they'll always catch the right error.)

Well, so do I: but some things I've inherited some of it.

I hope you don't mean TGrayScale enumerated type, because I'm sort of fond
of it. (-;

You could have noticed how I try to catch precisely "one off" errors in my
last tests, so I hope they're improved by now ...

> > Since I'm doing tests, I would benefit from having builds pre-release. But
> > only if this is not additional trouble to you.
>
> I might. (But perhaps I'll make an alpha shortly after implementing
> range-checking, anyway.)

No harm done, I guess. As it fits you the best.

Mirsad

Previous mail   Next mail   Unformatted/full headers
Overview  10 days   Subject   Date   Thread   Author  

Replies

In reply to

Back to main page of archive

Note: This page contains information that does not originate from the owner of this web site, but from the authors of the mails archived. The owner of this web site is not responsible for the content of such information. Any use of that infomation requires the consent of the respective author.

Where WWW addresses (URLs) in the mails archived are marked as hyperlinks, this is only for the comfort of the reader. The content of the web pages linked to like this does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the owner of this web site or of the authors of the mails archived. The owner of this web site is not responsible for the content of such web pages. Those pages are explicitly not to be considered as part of the content of this page, but merely as references.

This page was created by Crystal 0.999 (Linux 2.4.27/i686).