[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gm2] Follow up for bugs reported June 17
From: |
SiTex Graphics |
Subject: |
Re: [Gm2] Follow up for bugs reported June 17 |
Date: |
Fri, 9 Oct 2009 18:48:16 -0400 |
Hi Gaius,
First, some good news: my test application now builds and for the
first time produces correct output in some but not all tests. That is
a big step forward! Thank you very much for all your help with this
project so far.
In the course of getting the application to work, I coded around what
seems to be a bug in the conversion of record fields that are small
cardinals or integers. The short test module below illustrates the
bug. Compiled with
gm2 -I. -fiso -fmakeall -o test test.mod
The result is:
in = 1718
out = 12977846
I expect the compiler either to issue a type incompatibility error or
to produce the correct result. Note that either removing the in2
field or setting that field to 0 produces a correct result. Maybe that
will help track this one down.
This situation crops up quite a bit in the test application, and I
think this bug is likely causing at least some of the runtime
failures.
Thanks,
Scott
MODULE test;
FROM SYSTEM IMPORT CARDINAL16;
IMPORT STextIO, SWholeIO;
TYPE
InOut = RECORD
in : CARDINAL16;
in2 : CARDINAL16; (* remove this and it works?! *)
out : CARDINAL;
END;
VAR
io : InOut;
BEGIN
io.in:=1718;
io.in2:=198; (* or set in2 to 0 and it works *)
io.out:=io.in;
STextIO.WriteString("in = ");
SWholeIO.WriteCard(VAL(CARDINAL,io.in),1);
STextIO.WriteLn;
STextIO.WriteString("out = ");
SWholeIO.WriteCard(io.out,1);
STextIO.WriteLn;
END test.
- Re: [Gm2] Follow up for bugs reported June 17, SiTex Graphics, 2009/10/05
- Re: [Gm2] Follow up for bugs reported June 17, Gaius Mulley, 2009/10/06
- Re: [Gm2] Follow up for bugs reported June 17, SiTex Graphics, 2009/10/08
- Re: [Gm2] Follow up for bugs reported June 17, Gaius Mulley, 2009/10/09
- Re: [Gm2] Follow up for bugs reported June 17, SiTex Graphics, 2009/10/09
- Re: [Gm2] Follow up for bugs reported June 17, SiTex Graphics, 2009/10/09
- Re: [Gm2] Follow up for bugs reported June 17,
SiTex Graphics <=
- Re: [Gm2] Follow up for bugs reported June 17, Gaius Mulley, 2009/10/10
- Re: [Gm2] Follow up for bugs reported June 17, Gaius Mulley, 2009/10/14
- Re: [Gm2] Follow up for bugs reported June 17, SiTex Graphics, 2009/10/14
- Re: [Gm2] Follow up for bugs reported June 17, Gaius Mulley, 2009/10/15
- Re: [Gm2] Follow up for bugs reported June 17, SiTex Graphics, 2009/10/16
- Re: [Gm2] Follow up for bugs reported June 17, Gaius Mulley, 2009/10/16
- Re: [Gm2] Follow up for bugs reported June 17, SiTex Graphics, 2009/10/19
- Re: [Gm2] Follow up for bugs reported June 17, Iztok Kobal, 2009/10/12
- Re: [Gm2] Follow up for bugs reported June 17, SiTex Graphics, 2009/10/14