Jorge could you publish the tests for 1.1 because I could not find my way 11 conflicts for 1.1?
Stef > Hi Adrian, > > Sorry for the delay, too many things today. > > Ok, I added 17 test to Tests-Compiler which model the cases of > shadowing, at least the ones I could come up with. I also modified the > Encoder>>bindTemp: in order to make it a little bit more intention > revealing. > > My changes are in: > > Compiler-JorgeRessia.144 > Tests-JorgeRessia.46 > > Some comments: > > - In order to test the not interactive mode I had to mock the > Transcript. I could not find a better solution, if anybody has a > better one just let me know I'll change it. > - There is a special case which is that when you are NOT in > interactive mode if the shadowed variable is a temp then the syntax > error is triggered as in interactive mode. This is the behavior > implemented before I did the changes. Is that what we want? > - I added this test to Tests-Compiler package, I would have preferred > to add them to Compiler-Tests but there was nothing there. > > Cheers, > > Jorge > > On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Adrian Lienhard <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi Jorge, >> >> Just let me know when you think the code is ok for 1.0 or when you have >> something different that I should integrate. Thanks! >> >> Cheers, >> Adrian >> >> On Mar 4, 2010, at 09:37 , Jorge Ressia wrote: >> >>> Hi Adrian, >>> >>> Yep, I have the same problem as you. My idea was to make it work as >>> before without completely changing it. Basically because I did not >>> have the test support to validate my changes. >>> Anyhow, what I propose is to write a bunch of tests for every case >>> that we know and then if new cases show up add them to the test suite. >>> And then play with the code. >>> >>> I will work on that today, is that ok? >>> >>> For the explanation of what is going on is that now node can be an >>> instance variable node, then the behavior that was there was not >>> appropriate in the sense that instance variable nodes do not >>> understand #scope. >>> However, why this validation "(node isTemp or: [requestor >>> interactive])" was there in the first place is not that clear to me, >>> but it's been there since 1999. >>> >>> I'll try to build the tests and come up with a better solution. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Jorge >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 9:14 AM, Adrian Lienhard <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Jorge, >>>> >>>> I looked at the code to integrate in 1.0. And I really have troubles >>>> understanding it (even after drawing a boolean table for the different >>>> combinations of or: ifTrue: and: ifFalse:). Is it correct that the warning >>>> is shown when node isTemp is false and requestor interactive is true? Is >>>> the comment still accurate? >>>> >>>> This is the code: >>>> >>>> "When non-interactive raise the error only if its a duplicate" >>>> (node isTemp or: [requestor interactive]) >>>> ifTrue:[ ((node isTemp) and: [node scope <= 0] ) >>>> ifFalse: [^self notify:'Name is >>>> already defined' ]] >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Adrian >>>> >>>> On Mar 3, 2010, at 20:47 , Stéphane Ducasse wrote: >>>> >>>>> 11243 >>>>> ----- >>>>> >>>>> - Issue 2102: Fix the fact that local temp can shadow silently instance >>>>> var --- fixed >>>>> Problem fixed: >>>>> We cannot have twice the same block arg in a method >>>>> >>>>> [:each | each ...] >>>>> [:each | each ...] >>>>> >>>>> THANKS jorge :) >>>>> Do you like good bio beer? >>>>> >>>>> Stef >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
