Hi Karl-

This didn't get missed, just no time for further
development and testing.  A full fix would be
a bit tricky and my goal was PDL-2.x with a
release having working 64bit index support.

PDL-2.015 is that release.  While the fix is
implicitly an API change, I believe that the
work around to add ->sever() is simple and
easy to determine if needed: the bad code
will die with the warning message.

The plan for PDL-2.015 is to move to a
stabilization mode where critical issues are
addressed as required but other types of
issues such as bug fixes and features added
are done as they are contributed.

I plan to work on PDLA and PDLng as a clean
start and more agile development is the way
for PDL to step fully into the 21st century.

--Chris

On 12/6/2015 11:15, Karl Glazebrook wrote:
> 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

Reply via email to