Tcl 8.6 & IncrTcl...
in [TCL]
|
Prev: htclient: new experimental HTTP Client
Next: Question about Tcl event loop/Tcl_EventQueue and friends
From: Georgios Petasis on 26 Oct 2009 11:10 Hi all, It seems that Tcl 8.6 & Itcl do not cooperate any more, so I am puzzled whether applications that use Itcl are upgradable to Tcl 8.6 :-( A few months ago I have posted a few stack traces of tclsh crashing, despite the fact that I couldn't get a simple script to reproduce the problem. I just tested ActiveTcl 8.6.b2 and the bug is still there. But today I got a different crash: set WubHome E:/Tcl/wub/Wub lappend auto_path $WubHome package require Itcl ;# Itcl adds object-oriented facilities to Tcl. package require Site ;# The Wub HTTP server package. package require Nub ;# Thw Wub Domains package. itcl::class BlogProcessor { proc / {r args} { set content [Html::dict2json $r] dict set r -content $content dict set r content-type x-text/html-fragment return $r };# / };# class BlogProcessor Site init home $WubHome ini site.ini # Register domains... Nub domain /blog/ Direct namespace BlogProcessor # Start Site Server(s) Site start I know that I tried to use an Itcl namespace as a normal namespace (i.e. as expected by "Nub domain", but again tclsh crashes instead of returning an error. So, if we have to drop Itcl, what is the OO extension of nowadays? George
From: Donald G Porter on 26 Oct 2009 11:22 Georgios Petasis wrote: > A few months ago I have posted a few stack traces of tclsh crashing, > despite the fact that I couldn't get a simple script to reproduce the > problem. I just tested ActiveTcl 8.6.b2 and the bug is still there. Sounds like you should feed this back to ActiveState. .... > So, if we have to drop Itcl, what is the OO extension of nowadays? Did you try any of the Itcl 4.0b ? There's a new one taking shape as well. DGP
From: Larry W. Virden on 26 Oct 2009 11:26 On Oct 26, 11:10 am, Georgios Petasis <peta...(a)iit.demokritos.gr> wrote: > But today I got a different crash: > > So, if we have to drop Itcl, what is the OO extension of nowadays? In the original posting, I see use of tcl, itcl, and 2 wub extensions. Are you certain that you are not running into a problem in the wub extensions that are not compatible with either the 8.6 beta tcl or the 8.6 itcl ? Certainly the itcl test suite runs to completion during the test step of building tcl 8.6. So it seems as if some amount of itcl works with tcl 8.6. Given that the itcl core is first going to be distributed with tcl 8.6, fulfilling TIP # 50 < http://tip.tcl.tk/50 >. That would imply that it is going to be given attention comperable to other items bundled into the tcl source distribution. So it seems like the answer to your question is "There should be no need to drop Itcl - only to report bugs to the incident tracker - preferably with small coherent examples of the issue." While your example above is certainly small, it does include two extensions which could contribute to the issue. A small example using no extensions outside of the tcl distribution would be even better, as the maintainers would not have to debug through someone else's code to figure out where the issue is occurring.
From: Georgios Petasis on 26 Oct 2009 12:57 O/H Donald G Porter ������: > Georgios Petasis wrote: >> A few months ago I have posted a few stack traces of tclsh crashing, >> despite the fact that I couldn't get a simple script to reproduce the >> problem. I just tested ActiveTcl 8.6.b2 and the bug is still there. > > Sounds like you should feed this back to ActiveState. It is a Tcl bug. It happened also in the debug build I compiled my self, even with itcl 4.0... > > ... > >> So, if we have to drop Itcl, what is the OO extension of nowadays? > > Did you try any of the Itcl 4.0b ? There's a new one taking shape > as well. > > DGP Yes I tried. It sill crashes... George
From: Georgios Petasis on 26 Oct 2009 13:02
O/H Larry W. Virden έγραψε: > On Oct 26, 11:10 am, Georgios Petasis <peta...(a)iit.demokritos.gr> > wrote: > >> But today I got a different crash: > >> So, if we have to drop Itcl, what is the OO extension of nowadays? > > In the original posting, I see use of tcl, itcl, and 2 wub extensions. > Are you certain that you are not running into a problem in the wub > extensions that are not compatible with either the 8.6 beta tcl or the > 8.6 itcl ? Both wub extensions are Tcl-only. The fact that tclsh crashes, suggests that at least a check is missing somewhere... > > Certainly the itcl test suite runs to completion during the test step > of building tcl 8.6. So it seems as if some amount of itcl works with > tcl 8.6. Given that the itcl core is first going to be distributed > with tcl 8.6, fulfilling TIP # 50 < http://tip.tcl.tk/50 >. That would > imply that it is going to be given attention comperable to other items > bundled into the tcl source distribution. Yes, some basic parts seem to work. But crashes are frequent in my applications... > > So it seems like the answer to your question is "There should be no > need to drop Itcl - only to report bugs to the incident tracker - > preferably with small coherent examples of the issue." > > While your example above is certainly small, it does include two > extensions which could contribute to the issue. A small example using > no extensions outside of the tcl distribution would be even better, as > the maintainers would not have to debug through someone else's code to > figure out where the issue is occurring. > What happens if the scripts cannot be made smaller? George |