Re: [Oorexx-devel] Memory Problems ooRexx 5.0

Dear Erich, I guess you have more pressing matters and I think proper testing may need to wait until I have applied the fix but just for comparison I implemented the read method you proposed, I hope this is the way to do it: qfileIn = .stream~new(MyFileName) myArray = qfileIn~arrayIn() qf

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Clang warning removals broken 5.0.0 on Windows?

On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Erich Steinböck wrote: > I did the build using the older 7.0A SDK I had been using and everything >> when ok >> What version of the SDK are you using with the Community VS? >> > I'm on VS 2015 Community, and I remember that installation was a pain. I > had to redo

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Clang warning removals broken 5.0.0 on Windows?

> > I did the build using the older 7.0A SDK I had been using and everything > when ok > What version of the SDK are you using with the Community VS? > I'm on VS 2015 Community, and I remember that installation was a pain. I had to redo it twice because I didn't know which boxes to tick to get thos

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Clang warning removals broken 5.0.0 on Windows?

Ok, I managed to get this installed and get a build made. When I installed,thought I was also getting the Windows 10 SDK, but I can't find anything that looks like the SDK (i.e., nothing with an include directory). I did the build using the older 7.0A SDK I had been using and everything when ok. Wh

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Memory Problems ooRexx 5.0

Hello Erich, I have no knowledge on how to apply these changes to my existing installation. For my MAC I have used the installer provided by BSF4ooRexx (Rony Flatscher et al) since the last version on the oo side for MAC is 4.1.3. There has been a lot of water under the bridges since then. I c

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Memory Problems ooRexx 5.0

Hi P.O, The second time it takes 50 MINUTES to finish! > > > I can confirm the performance hit you're observing. I really have no good > answer what is causing this .. I have opened [bugs:#1467] > . Rick has provided a patch for the performance issue

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Memory Problems ooRexx 5.0

> > For best performance, use stream~arrayIn(), which is by far preferable > That was meant in comparison with DO WHILE qfileIn~lines <> 0 and stream~lines("normal") or DO stream~lines()or SIGNAL ON NOTREADY using charin to read the entire file into a string followed by a makearray > on the string

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Memory Problems ooRexx 5.0

Hi Erich, you wrote For best performance, use stream~arrayIn(), which is by far preferable to > any other means. I wonder if this is something that has changed and been established through comparisons using 5.0.0. I ask, because sometime ago there was a lot of discussion on the rexxla list (or

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Testing the secirty manager message REQUIRES on ooRexx 3.2, 4.2 and 5.0beta

On 06.07.2017 15:33, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: > > Hi there, > > in the past days I have come up with a testGroup to test the ooRexx security > manager in a way such > that the tests can be run under ooRexx 3.2, 4.x and 5.0beta, cf. > , where also the

[Oorexx-devel] Testing the secirty manager message REQUIRES on ooRexx 3.2, 4.2 and 5.0beta

Hi there, in the past days I have come up with a testGroup to test the ooRexx security manager in a way such that the tests can be run under ooRexx 3.2, 4.x and 5.0beta, cf. , where also the output of running the testGroup on all three ooRexx versio

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Clang warning removals broken 5.0.0 on Windows?

On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 7:26 AM, Erich Steinböck wrote: > Rick, yes, change [r11217] > for [bugs:1447] > introduced the use of (I > think ANSI C99) printf format string specifiers %zu and %zd for size_t

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Clang warning removals broken 5.0.0 on Windows?

Rick, yes, change [r11217] for [bugs:1447] introduced the use of (I think ANSI C99) printf format string specifiers %zu and %zd for size_t and our wholenumber_t types to get rid of compiler warnings on Wi