I think this got missed Craig?
> On 19 Nov 2015, at 3:17 am, Chris Marshall <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think it would be worth adding for PDL-2.015 > if you have time. What do you think, Craig? > > --Chris > > On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 10:57 AM, Craig DeForest <[email protected]> > wrote: > I don’t think it would be that difficult, now that I think about it. The > splitdim() trans hooks could just check ndims in the parent and child before > entering their dereferencing loops. > > >> On Nov 18, 2015, at 8:53 AM, Chris Marshall <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Craig- >> >> How difficult would it be to have it >> work for dataflow piddles that have >> their dimensions in the right order? >> >> In that case, the reshape would be >> equivalent to a sequence of splitdim() >> calls but much less tedious to execute. >> >> It could still die and give a message >> if things were hinky. >> >> --Chris >> >> On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Craig DeForest <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> I “fixed” it by masking it out — attempting to do the thing that tickled the >> bug now throws a meaningful error message instead. >> >> The issue is in the way reshape() is implemented (using setdims()), >> interacting with the way mv() is implemented. The mv() code pre-caches the >> dimlist offsets for both parent and child, so if some dims disappear from >> the parent or child, then in the next dataflow operation the mv() trans code >> can dereference a pointer to hyperspace. One way to fix that would be to >> check against ndims() each time — but setdims() and reshape() shouldn’t be >> called on dataflow-linked PDLs anyhow (they’re mostly for doing things like >> slurping in a data file and then formatting it once it is in memory), so it >> made sense (to me) to simply mask out the behavior. >> >> There are some tests to make sure reshape() throws an error in the proper >> condition, and doesn’t in other conditions. >> >> >> >> >> > On Nov 14, 2015, at 8:02 PM, Karl Glazebrook <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > >> > >> > The reshape() bug was fixed? >> > >> > Is there a test? >> > >> > Karl >> > >> > >> >> On 15 Nov 2015, at 8:18 am, Chris Marshall <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> All- >> >> >> >> ...and should be appearing at a mirror >> >> near you soon. This release is the first >> >> release candidate for the upcoming >> >> PDL-2.015 release. It has fixes for the >> >> major problems found in the PDL-2.014 >> >> release. >> >> >> >> Please test for your platformsand with >> >> your PDL modules and programs as soon as >> >> possible. The PDL-2.015 release will be >> >> no later than 01-Dec and by next weekend >> >> if things test well! >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Chris >> >> >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Go from Idea to Many App Stores Faster with Intel(R) XDK Give your users amazing mobile app experiences with Intel(R) XDK. Use one codebase in this all-in-one HTML5 development environment. Design, debug & build mobile apps & 2D/3D high-impact games for multiple OSs. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=254741911&iu=/4140 _______________________________________________ pdl-general mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pdl-general
