02:43.27 |
*** join/#brlcad ibot
(~ibot@rikers.org) |
02:43.27 |
*** topic/#brlcad is BRL-CAD
Open Source Solid Modeling || http://brlcad.org || http://sf.net/projects/brlcad
|| #brlcad logs: http://ibot.rikers.org/%23brlcad/
|| BRL-CAD release 7.20.2 is posted (20110701) || BRL-CAD is
participating in the ESA Summer of Code in Space! |
05:33.42 |
*** join/#brlcad jordisayol
(~jordisayo@unaffiliated/jordisayol) |
05:58.31 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03brlcad * r47767
10/brlcad/trunk/src/mged/CMakeLists.txt: apparently doing seomthing
wrong, so document the FIXME accordingly mged needs to depend on
the tclscripts or it won't work for non default and make install
target builds (e.g., make regress) |
06:04.45 |
brlcad |
wonders what he's doing wrong
given that's what looks like the documented way to do
it |
06:06.15 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03brlcad * r47768
10/brlcad/trunk/src/tclscripts/mged/CMakeLists.txt: ws |
12:00.51 |
*** join/#brlcad merzo
(~merzo@193.254.217.44) |
15:22.33 |
brlcad |
n_reed: it's not inconceivable that the solids
test image is flawed, but would be a little bit
surprising |
15:24.00 |
brlcad |
the regression scripts used to use mater
"plastic var=val var2=val2" prior to release 7.0 (open
sourcing) |
15:25.21 |
brlcad |
they were all yanked at 7.0 since a couple had
problems (unrelated), but then later returned a few months later in
their current form |
15:26.12 |
brlcad |
presumably butler was specifically testing
whether the mater "plastic {var val var2 val}" syntax worked as
that was when that change was made |
15:31.05 |
n_reed |
I agree that the presence of the brace syntax
suggests an intent to test said syntax |
15:32.41 |
n_reed |
still, all my testing thus far suggests that
the syntax, at least recently, has not worked as intended |
15:34.02 |
n_reed |
it could be that the ineffectiveness of the
brace syntax simply went unnoticed because it didn't generate any
obvious errors (the raytrace and test still succeed) |
15:34.27 |
n_reed |
of course i could be wrong, and would be
happying to continue investigating |
15:35.36 |
n_reed |
but honestly i think it's best if you look
into it yourself, because if your not convinced one way or another,
I'm not going to bother with any changes |
15:37.42 |
n_reed |
s/happying/happy/ |
15:37.59 |
n_reed |
s/your/you're |
15:38.38 |
n_reed |
need's more
caffeine |
15:41.10 |
n_reed |
NEEDS more sleep too
x/ |
15:46.54 |
brlcad |
I just pulled up the "original" solids
reference image from before it was tclified |
15:47.25 |
brlcad |
looks like a bug |
15:48.04 |
brlcad |
OR he was intentionally testing to make sure
{} syntax fails ;) |
15:48.49 |
brlcad |
that there be funny |
15:52.53 |
brlcad |
I bet I see what happened. he also added a
new dsp primitive to the test, so the image already changed/needed
to change |
15:53.16 |
brlcad |
so a pixdiff would have already been reporting
changes, even more easy to overlook those four others that changed
due to syntax |
15:54.50 |
brlcad |
n_reed: looks like you're good to un-revert
your fix back in |
15:54.58 |
brlcad |
just update the reference while you're at it
;) |
15:55.38 |
brlcad |
the old one doesn't have a dsp or I'd just
drop it in, needs a new reference |
15:56.31 |
brlcad |
cross-check it with a couple platforms to make
sure you get no off-by errors .. |
15:57.13 |
brlcad |
wishes we had a simh
vgr |
15:58.30 |
n_reed |
what is a simh vgr? |
15:58.53 |
brlcad |
vgr was the name of the original baseline
reference computer |
15:59.24 |
brlcad |
the numerics were stable and rather
well-understood for "correctness" |
16:00.39 |
brlcad |
the benchmark reference images were mostly all
created on vgr, so then if you were on a different computer and got
pixel values that were ever so slightly off, you could
investigate |
16:01.20 |
brlcad |
off by more than one rgb value, and you were
looking at a bug (either in code, or compiler, or hardware ... all
encountered over the years) |
16:02.32 |
brlcad |
simh is the "simulation hardware" project
where they simulate various legacy systems (including a couple
systems very similar to vgr's hardware) |
16:02.54 |
brlcad |
basically, it's a VM for really old
hardware |
16:03.39 |
brlcad |
if we could simulate vgr, we could regenerate
new baseline images with a fair amount of confidence that they're
"correct" |
16:04.32 |
brlcad |
two of our benchmark images frequently results
in a handful of off-by-one differences -- those were the two not
generated on vgr |
17:13.25 |
*** join/#brlcad packrat
(~packrator@c-98-209-146-133.hsd1.mi.comcast.net) |
17:38.52 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03n_reed * r47769
10/brlcad/trunk/regress/solidspix.asc: changed solids-regress
reference image to agree with change in output-pix caused by fix in
r47659 |
17:47.07 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03n_reed * r47770
10/brlcad/trunk/src/libbu/parse.c: revert to previous
revision |
19:33.03 |
*** join/#brlcad merzo
(~merzo@131-179-132-95.pool.ukrtel.net) |
19:50.00 |
*** join/#brlcad Forth
(~Forth@92.242.118.253) |
20:10.54 |
brlcad |
starseeker: how do you rebuild a specific
object file? |
20:12.10 |
brlcad |
I just modified vls.c, want to make sure it
still compiles, but don't want to relink libbu or some other binary
.. is there some/any way to do that? |
20:12.49 |
brlcad |
old school makefile would have been a simple
"make vls.o" |
20:22.42 |
*** join/#brlcad Technicus
(~Technicus@DSLPool-net208-2.wctc.net) |
20:24.19 |
*** join/#brlcad Technicus
(~Technicus@DSLPool-net208-2.wctc.net) |
20:28.45 |
*** join/#brlcad Technicus
(~Technicus@DSLPool-net208-2.wctc.net) |
21:45.35 |
starseeker |
brlcad: not sure you can :-( |
22:03.34 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03n_reed * r47771
10/brlcad/trunk/src/other/perplex/scanner_template.c: allow name of
lexer routine and app data parameter to be specified with
defines |
22:04.06 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03starseeker * r47772
10/brlcad/trunk/src/ (mged/CMakeLists.txt
tclscripts/CMakeLists.txt): Make mged depend on all
pkgIndex/tclIndex targets. Probably should do the same for
archer... |
22:05.02 |
starseeker |
ah HAH! |
22:05.13 |
starseeker |
brlcad: try this: make vls.c.o |
22:05.58 |
starseeker |
I think that'll do what you want |
22:07.35 |
starseeker |
scratch that - only need to do that for archer
if we make archer into a binary target ala mged |
22:08.12 |
starseeker |
unless we fake an archer build target just to
hang those dependencies off of... |
22:08.14 |
starseeker |
hmm... |
22:16.58 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03starseeker * r47773
10/brlcad/trunk/src/archer/CMakeLists.txt: Make a stab at switching
archer over to a real live build target instead of just a
configure-time copy. Untested on Windows. |
22:20.21 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03starseeker * r47774
10/brlcad/trunk/src/archer/CMakeLists.txt: Now that we have an
archer target, hang the tclscript dependencies off of it. |
22:21.15 |
starseeker |
re-reads his channel comments
and realizes they're a bit mixed - brlcad, in my testing the make
vls.c.o worked |
22:25.57 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03starseeker * r47775
10/brlcad/trunk/src/CMakeLists.txt: checking clean configure - need
tclscripts target lists defined before archer and mged targets are
defined so a one-shot configure gets the right
information. |
22:39.26 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03starseeker * r47776
10/brlcad/trunk/src/archer/CMakeLists.txt: |
22:39.27 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: Archer needs some more dependencies
called out (mostly tcl/tk packages it uses). |
22:39.27 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 'make archer' now does more or less
what you expect - the only exception being |
22:39.27 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: the Docbook man pages. Not sure
whether to make those dependencies... |
22:41.45 |
brlcad |
starseeker: hm, looks like that'll only work
if I'm in the cmake subdir for that .o, yes? |
22:41.48 |
brlcad |
should work |
22:42.11 |
brlcad |
libbu/tcl.c.o would have been cool |
22:44.10 |
brlcad |
starseeker: and what was wrong with my
ADD_DEPENDENCIES() line? from my reading of the target names, that
should have at least gotten the top-level tclscripts/tclIndex and
pkgIndex.tcl files |
22:45.45 |
starseeker |
I think there was a capitalization error
somewhere... anyway, the new logic should get 'em all |
22:46.05 |
starseeker |
tclindex vs tclIndex, I think... |
22:46.05 |
brlcad |
wouldn't it have given me an error about an
unknown dep though? |
22:46.32 |
starseeker |
um. not sure - let me do a quick
test |
22:47.08 |
brlcad |
and for that same reason, I added the one for
pkgindex too -- or did it also have some case problem? |
22:47.27 |
starseeker |
nope - no error. It's probably figuring it
will be defined later or something... |
22:48.11 |
starseeker |
not sure - as soon as I saw what you were
trying to do I knew something more... energetic would be needed, so
I just dove into the macro logic |
22:48.38 |
brlcad |
I knew something more generic was
needed |
22:48.50 |
starseeker |
we *should* be good now |
22:48.50 |
brlcad |
more questioning why that simple test wasn't
working |
22:49.15 |
starseeker |
unless you want all the docbook man pages
added as dependencies of archer/mged when they're turned
on |
22:49.20 |
starseeker |
ah |
22:49.45 |
starseeker |
looks
again... |
22:49.49 |
brlcad |
yeah, i wasn't just trying to get past it,
trying to understand what was going on |
22:49.53 |
starseeker |
yeah, it was pkgindex not pkgIndex |
22:49.57 |
brlcad |
makes sense if it's case sensitive |
22:50.43 |
brlcad |
means I DID understand everything, just a
pedantic detail missing from the auto-target naming that the macro
was doing |
22:50.46 |
starseeker |
must confess it's kinda cool
to be able to do "make archer" and have it jsut
work... |
22:50.49 |
starseeker |
right |
22:50.57 |
brlcad |
test confirmed here |
22:51.57 |
brlcad |
make regress from a new build was failing due
to the scripts dep |
22:52.45 |
brlcad |
a nice side effect now is that you can "make
regress", have it compile everything the regress suite uses, then
make and see what else is likely not being exercised by the
testing |
22:52.52 |
starseeker |
yeah, make libbu/tcl.c.o doesn't work work...
at a guess, they didn't want to populate all the parent make files
with all child targets... |
22:55.34 |
starseeker |
yeah, that makes sense - I was probably always
running "make regress" *after* doing make all |
22:55.45 |
starseeker |
oops |
22:55.56 |
brlcad |
likewise, I just happened to have a fresh
build and was testing nick's discovery |
22:56.06 |
brlcad |
s/build/checkout/ |
22:56.33 |
starseeker |
talk about an oldie... |
22:56.46 |
brlcad |
that's not old, less than 10 years
;) |
22:57.05 |
starseeker |
well, true, but I mean as part of the
regression logic/data |
22:57.11 |
starseeker |
eeep |
22:58.19 |
starseeker |
brlcad: how do you want me to handle it with
the thrid party packages/options? I can just document all 3rd
party options in the file, or I can set it up to only document the
subset that are already documented for configure.ac... |
22:58.25 |
starseeker |
third even... |
22:58.42 |
starseeker |
instructs fingers to get with
the program... |
23:12.49 |
brlcad |
what do you mean? options such as? |
23:13.41 |
brlcad |
what was documented by configure? it
autodocumented subconfigures and we didn't directly document
anything that I'm aware of other than the enable/disable-build
options |
23:13.45 |
starseeker |
well, for example, right now there aren't any
descriptions for re2c, lemon, tkhtml, tkpng, etc. in
INSTALL |
23:14.19 |
brlcad |
the documenting stopped when cmake docs were
rolled in, those mostly all came after |
23:14.23 |
starseeker |
we do have zlib, png, opennurbs, utahrle,
etc. |
23:14.32 |
starseeker |
right - so what are my criteria for adding
things? |
23:14.34 |
brlcad |
so more enable/disable options |
23:14.52 |
starseeker |
vs. ignoreing 'em |
23:15.25 |
brlcad |
if they're significant enough to warrant a
src/other building, they should be listed |
23:15.40 |
starseeker |
alrightie |
23:15.59 |
brlcad |
all the more reason to be cautious about
adopting new deps, they have overhead to be consistent |
23:16.34 |
brlcad |
can ignore any that are going away in the next
3-6 months (like jove) |
23:17.33 |
starseeker |
won't be too bad once I get up and rolling,
just wanted to be sure I wasn't wasting my time on things you
didn't want documented |
23:18.59 |
brlcad |
could put re2c, lemon, and perplex into their
own subdir in src/other, all toggled off just one flag |
23:19.34 |
starseeker |
really? arrgh :-) after all that nice find
logic too... |
23:19.58 |
brlcad |
don't have to |
23:20.01 |
brlcad |
it's fine separate |
23:20.08 |
brlcad |
it's if you wanted to consolidate
logic |
23:20.38 |
starseeker |
nods - worth keeping in mind
for later, but right now I'd say leave it as-is, since it's
functional |
23:20.46 |
brlcad |
similarly with hv3 under tkhtml, similarly
minor |
23:21.50 |
starseeker |
nods |
23:22.14 |
brlcad |
aside from hv3 being a versioned-dir
tsker |
23:22.35 |
starseeker |
should bug bob about trying that shiny new
accordian widget out on the new-improved help browser |
23:27.39 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03starseeker * r47777
10/brlcad/trunk/src/tclscripts/CMakeLists.txt: mind the advanced
markings... |
23:28.03 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03starseeker * r47778
10/brlcad/trunk/CMakeLists.txt: Add some aliases for the strict
flags. |
23:43.52 |
starseeker |
isn't entirely sure if he
cares for the idea of enable/disable options for word
size |
23:46.20 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03brlcad * r47779
10/brlcad/trunk/src/libfb/fb_obj.c: reorder to avoid the need for
forward declarations. make the command table internal to the
function (yet still static so it persists). |
23:52.40 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03starseeker * r47780
10/brlcad/trunk/misc/CMake/BRLCAD_Util.cmake: build the disable
options list in a different way. |
23:54.01 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03starseeker * r47781
10/brlcad/trunk/CMakeLists.txt: Add docs for 32/64 bit
BRLCAD_WORD_SIZE |
23:57.52 |
brlcad |
they don't really make sense for word
size |
23:58.16 |
brlcad |
word size is just that, unless you change it
back to configure's meaning being a flag for 64-bit
on/off |