Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from that. This is bad.
I can't figure out what the problem is, and hope someone can shed some light.
Test implementation based on rtt/tests/state_test.cpp
Peter, this is based on the plugins/rtalloc that you pulled from my github into rtt-2.0-mainline sometime ago. But as that isn't in v1 nor v2 masters, I can only give you a test that works on my github repo. I can't base it on anything from your git* AFAICT.
Cheers
Stephen
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| 0001-plugins-rtalloc-Add-test-case-demonstrating-failing-.patch | 15.67 KB |
| 0002-plugins-rtalloc-Preliminary-implementation-of-rtstri.patch | 3.06 KB |
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from that.
> This is bad.
That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor for
rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just like in C++.
>
> I can't figure out what the problem is, and hope someone can shed some
> light.
>
> Test implementation based on rtt/tests/state_test.cpp
>
> Peter, this is based on the plugins/rtalloc that you pulled from my github
> into rtt-2.0-mainline sometime ago. But as that isn't in v1 nor v2
> masters, I can only give you a test that works on my github repo. I can't
> base it on anything from your git* AFAICT.
As decided on the developer's meeting ;-), the rtstring moved into RTT in v2.0
under the name of RTT::rt_string (rtt/rt_string.hpp). I used the same name in
C++ as in scripting for consistency reasons.
So it should be dead easy to add a unit test to the rtt.
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
>> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
>> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
>> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from that.
>> This is bad.
>
> That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor for
> rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just like in C++.
My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
>> I can't figure out what the problem is, and hope someone can shed some
>> light.
>>
>> Test implementation based on rtt/tests/state_test.cpp
>>
>> Peter, this is based on the plugins/rtalloc that you pulled from my github
>> into rtt-2.0-mainline sometime ago. But as that isn't in v1 nor v2
>> masters, I can only give you a test that works on my github repo. I can't
>> base it on anything from your git* AFAICT.
>
> As decided on the developer's meeting ;-), the rtstring moved into RTT in v2.0
> under the name of RTT::rt_string (rtt/rt_string.hpp). I used the same name in
> C++ as in scripting for consistency reasons.
>
> So it should be dead easy to add a unit test to the rtt.
Excellent!
S
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter
[PATCH] Demonstrate failing rtstring ctor
On Tuesday 21 September 2010 13:19:15 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 03:26 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 September 2010 02:55:22 S Roderick wrote:
> >> Attached patches add a test to OCL v1 to create rtstring instances in
> >> scripting. The test fails to use rtstring ctor, and instead attempts to
> >> create a string (ie std::string) first and then create rstring from
> >> that. This is bad.
> >
> > That's probably because std::string is hardcoded in the parsers, and it
> > assumes every char* is going into a datasource of std::string. The only
> > solution seems to be to pass it as a char* into a registered constructor
> > for rt_string if a user writes it like this : rt_string("foo"), just
> > like in C++.
>
> My test case has an example exactly like that, I believe. It fails.
Could you add this as a bug report ? I'll loose track of it otherwise...
Thanks,
Peter