Re: [Bug-apl] ⎕NL 'var_name'

[Juergen Sauermann]

Hi Christian,

there is no problem at all reporting something that looks like a GNU APL 
fault but turns out
to be a fault in the APL code.

As of today, GNU APL is definitely not 100% error-free, but every 
trouble report brings us
closer to that point. So please continue reporting.

/// Jürgen


On 03/11/2015 03:15 AM, Christian Robert wrote:
> I will try to do that in the future, but it will be hard ;-) please 
> forgive me.
>
> completely out of the current subject, any one saw that video ?
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmT80OseAGs
>
> it looks like a 100% "Dialog APL" advertising.
>
> don't ever try to do it in "gnu apl(GPL 3)" nor even in my favorite 
> "nars2000(GPL 3)", it wont work at all, will fail at
> the first or second function definition.
>
> but it was really fun to watch.
>
> see you,
>
> Xtian.
>
> On 2015-03-10 22:03, Blake McBride wrote:
> > I've found that when learning a new system, it is easy to find bugs 
> > in it - which turn out to be a misunderstanding on my part.  Take it 
> > from someone with years experience doing nothing but APL, GNU APL is 
> > pretty solid.  If you encounter a bug, definitely look closely at 
> > your code.
> >
> > Glad to help.
> >
> > --blake
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 8:49 PM, Christian Robert 
> > <address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>> 
> > wrote:
> >
> >     You are right. QuadNC do the right thing.
> >
> >     btw: this is why I asked for some kind of a "newbie" list for gnu 
> > apl. I don't want to bother the developpers at each time
> >           *I think* of a problem in the software. 9/10+ are my own 
> > ignorance.
> >
> >     thanks, and still learning from near zero.
> >
> >     Xtian.
> >
> >
> >     On 2015-03-10 21:09, Blake McBride wrote:
> >
> >         I think you are confusing ⎕NC and ⎕NL
> >
> >         On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 7:16 PM, Christian Robert 
> > <address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden> 
> > <mailto:address@hidden 
> > <mailto:address@hidden>>> wrote:
> >
> >              Hi,
> >
> >              I'm pretty sure this was working a few days ago to test 
> > if a variable has a value or not at entry to a function.
> >
> >              Is it broken or I miss something ?
> >
> >              thanks,
> >
> >              Xtian.
> >
> >
> >                     ∇Time[⎕]∇
> >                   ∇
> >              [0]   z←ncpu Time what;⎕io;start;stop;day;old_____ncpu
> >              [1]   →(1=⎕NL 'ncpu')/already_set
> >              [2]     ncpu←1 ⍝ the default
> >              [3]  already_set:
> >              [4]   ⎕io←0
> >              [5]   start←¯5↑⎕ts
> >              [6]   day←start[0]
> >              [7]   start ← 32 24 60 60 1000 ⊥ start
> >              [8]   old_ncpu←⎕SYL [25;1]
> >              [9]   ⍎what
> >              [10]  stop←¯5↑⎕ts
> >              [11]  ⎕SYL [25;1]← old_ncpu
> >              [12]  →(stop[0]=day)/ok
> >              [13]    stop[0]←stop[0]+1
> >              [14] ok:
> >              [15]  stop ← 32 24 60 60 1000 ⊥ stop
> >              [16]  z←(⍕(stop-start)÷1000),' seconds at num core = 
> > ',(⍕⎕syl[25;1]),' of ', ⍕⎕syl[24;1]
> >                   ∇
> >                     Time 'z←⍳1000'
> >              DOMAIN ERROR
> >              Time[1]  →(1=⎕NL 'ncpu')/already_set
> >                            ^           ^