Right, about the custom code scanner/pre-processor/compiler macro idea, I
forgot to mention that you could use such a tool to remedy problems in 4D.
For background, some of this takes a syntax in your code that enables you
to identify the following:
-- Required parameters
-- Optional parameters
--
> Also trying to justify reducing the size of the process variable table.
> Supposedly having 1 - 10 object variables was far superior to 100 process
> variables. Who the hell cares if your process variable table is 1MB in
size
> when everyone has over 4,000MB to work with? And don’t try to say “it
> Nobody likes when someone says “what’s wrong with you? You are a weirdo for
> not
> thinking of this.”
>
> you are going to catch a lot more flies with honey than with vinegar. Give it
> a
> try you are going to find it really does work.
> Who do you want to talk to or listen to? A “nice
On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 3:00 PM,
Tim Nevels wrote:
> [snip]
>
>
> I sure can. Remember when C_OBJECT variables were introduced? There were
> several developers here that talked about completely overhauling all their
> code to eliminate process and interprocess variables and replace all of it
>
On Oct 11, 2017, at 10:40 AM, David Adams wrote:
> If you don't mind and are on the forums, would you mind putting in a
> feature request? And, for what it's worth, it would be super weird if they
> *hadn't* thought of this. The languages they write in have all kinds of
> compiler pre-processing i
> This would be super useful!. Great feature that would make it much easier
to adapt methods so that they would run in
> preemptive mode. The 4D engineers probably never even thought about doing
something like this.
If you don't mind and are on the forums, would you mind putting in a
feature reque
On Oct 10, 2017, at 1:16 PM, David Adams wrote:
> * TRACE is not thread-safe. It's also meaningless compiled. And yet, it
> blocks you. Why?
Probably the 4D engineers never thought to exclude it. It should be excluded
since it has no impact when running compiled.
> * SET TEXT TO PASTEBOARD is
Thanks Tim!
More findings:
* I don't get it. I really am unclear how exactly things are supposed to be
set up. It's confusing, at least to me. I've tried diagrams and writing it
out...but I'm still not clear.
* I want to use the 'indifferent' execution mode everywhere I can, but
that's not worki
On Oct 10, 2017, at 11:12 AM, David Adams wrote:
> Typical, my "summary" is longer than the original.
You are a true trail blazer, David. And you know what they say… trail blazers
are the ones that take the arrows. And you are definitely bloody from all your
preemptive process work. Possible ne
Right, I just scanned a big code base for methods passed to CALL WORKER
(some my code, some not) and found that 5 out of 7 won't run in preemptive
mode.
Oh crap.
**
4D Internet Users Group (4D iNUG)
FAQ: http://lists.4d.com/faqnu
Typical, my "summary" is longer than the original.
**
4D Internet Users Group (4D iNUG)
FAQ: http://lists.4d.com/faqnug.html
Archive: http://lists.4d.com/archives.html
Options: http://lists.4d.com/mailman/options/4d_tech
Unsub:
To summarize the bit above:
-- If you pass non-preemptive code to a pre-emptive worker, it won't work.
-- That's not a bug, that's a limitation.
-- 4D doesn't automatically handle this situation well, but they've said
that they'll make ON ERR CALL work, which seems like a reasonable response.
-
I've finally tracked down a weird problem. I have some code that I'm
(still) trying to run in a worker. I've got the system set up so that I can
launch in cooperative or preemptive mode based on a setting. This way, if
there's a problem with preemptive mode, we can tweak a config setting and
try ag
13 matches
Mail list logo
