Re: [wxlua-users] recursive calls runbuffer

[John Labenski]

On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 3:35 AM, klaas.holwerda n...@klaasholwerda.nl wrote:

  Hi John,

 Indeed if out commented, it works okay again.
 So recursive calls is not the problem it seems, only the assert.
 Don't know if the m_is_running is very important, but if yes or just handy
 to have, i think the up/down counter would deal with the situation.


Ok, I made the change to increment an int as you suggested. Now
m_is_running is just informational.

Regards,
John
--
___
wxlua-users mailing list
wxlua-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wxlua-users

Re: [wxlua-users] recursive calls runbuffer

[klaas.holwerda]

Hi John,

Indeed if out commented, it works okay again.
So recursive calls is not the problem it seems, only the assert.
Don't know if the m_is_running is very important, but if yes or just handy to have, i think the 
up/down counter would deal with the situation.


Regards,

Klaas

On 04/02/2014 06:01 AM, John Labenski wrote:
On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 7:11 PM, klaas.holwerda n...@klaasholwerda.nl 
mailto:n...@klaasholwerda.nl wrote:


Hi,

Recursive calls to RunBuffer() is a problem, gives an assert.

int wxLuaState::RunBuffer(const char buf[], size_t size, const wxString 
name, int nresults)
{
 wxCHECK_MSG(Ok(), LUA_ERRRUN, wxT(Invalid wxLuaState));
 wxCHECK_MSG(!M_WXLSTATEDATA-m_wxlStateData-m_is_running, LUA_ERRRUN, 
wxT(Lua interpreter is
already running));


If you rem these out does it work normally? I think I added the check so people wouldn't forget 
that it was running, but there probably is any reason why it wouldn't work



--
___
wxlua-users mailing list
wxlua-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wxlua-users