Activity
From 07/09/2015 to 08/07/2015
08/06/2015
07/28/2015
- 08:03 AM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- The 2592a/10900 was merged to trunk as revision 10901 and the notification email was sent to team.
07/24/2015
- 12:27 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- The 2592a/10900 passed the regression testing. The harness results were saved as /opt/secure/clients/timco/majic_test...
07/23/2015
- 06:04 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Code review 2592a/10900.
The changes look good. Please regression test and merge into trunk as soon as possible. - 04:17 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- I did a quick test and the warning is gone with the small change. I committed the update on 2592 as revno 10900.
- 03:21 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Greg,
I will add the requested notes in javadocs.
Eric,
2592a it is, I mistyped.
Thanks. I am replacing the @H... - 03:10 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Ovidiu Maxiniuc wrote:
> The BDT has the @equals()@ method overridden so two different java objects (an @integer@ an... - 03:08 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- > I used a Map having BaseDataType as keys. This is a very bad option! We should never use BDT for keying/fast looku...
- 02:41 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Eric,
I found out why the server log is filled with @Two AbstractOutputParameterAssigner configured with same wrap...
07/21/2015
- 03:26 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- The 2582 branch advanced to revno 10916 after it was rebased with trunk revno 10897. There were no conflicts.
Then i... - 02:26 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Please go ahead and rebase. If there are no conflicts as expected, go ahead and merge into the trunk.
- 01:43 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Eric Faulhaber wrote:
> Code review 2592/10915:
>
> The items from the previous code review appear to have been a... - 01:10 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Code review 2592/10915:
The items from the previous code review appear to have been addressed.
Ovidiu, what is ...
07/20/2015
- 10:08 AM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- > Using the BaseDataType could be a solution, but we need to store somewhere the compatibility matrix. I guess this w...
07/17/2015
- 04:00 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Ovidiu, about revision 10912:
> * SourceNameMapper.getParameter:941 - you should check ... - 02:22 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Greg Shah wrote:
> Aren't all implicit cases using the BaseDataType constructor?
At this point, no. The @ControlF... - 02:07 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Aren't all implicit cases using the BaseDataType constructor?
- 01:57 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- I was going further and investigating some other failed tests from #1868. I noticed that in P2J some query was failin...
- 06:05 AM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Ovidiu, about revision 10912:
* SourceNameMapper.getParameter:941 - you should check for @param >= ie.getParameterLi... - 05:36 AM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Paul Eames wrote:
> I see this is marked as blocking #1868.
>
> Can you give me a couple of examples of where we ... - 05:06 AM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- I see this is marked as blocking #1868.
Can you give me a couple of examples of where we are relying on this impli...
07/16/2015
- 11:11 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Ovidiu Maxiniuc wrote:
> * if a procedure was called then that is a serious error and the condition will stop execut...
07/15/2015
- 04:05 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- I updated the branch. What is new in revno 10910:
* moved @FieldAssigner@, @OutputExtentField@ and @InputOutputExten... - 05:31 AM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- The revno 10909/2592 test ended with some failures:
* 3 tests in CTRL+C (known to fail in most runs)
* gso_269/48 i...
07/14/2015
- 02:44 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Ovidiu Maxiniuc wrote:
> There is another reason for my question: once those classed are moved to new package the co... - 02:18 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Eric Faulhaber wrote:
> Ovidiu Maxiniuc wrote:
> > ... To be honest, I am not completely pleased with the class hie... - 02:07 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Ovidiu Maxiniuc wrote:
> The new part is in @ else if (AEP.isAssignableFrom(expectedType) && AEP.isAssignableFrom(ar... - 01:56 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Eric Faulhaber wrote:
> Code review 2592/10908
>
> I only looked at the diffs from 10907 to 10908.
>
> The con... - 12:16 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Ovidiu Maxiniuc wrote:
> ... To be honest, I am not completely pleased with the class hierarchy I merged because it ... - 12:12 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Code review 2592/10908
I only looked at the diffs from 10907 to 10908.
The conversion change in @control_flow.r...
07/13/2015
- 02:56 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- I have found a new issue when calling a procedure with a single EXTENT parameter. Consider a procedure...
- 07:15 AM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Eric Faulhaber wrote:
> Ovidiu, I did a quick review of 2592/10907 (though you have not asked for it yet). It looks ... - 12:16 AM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Ovidiu, I did a quick review of 2592/10907 (though you have not asked for it yet). It looks as though you're nearly f...
- 01:55 PM Feature #1628: fix any incompatibilities or missing features of NO-ECHO support
- All changes except Stream class is passed regression testing.
Changes in Stream class is not fully correct. gso_103 ...
07/10/2015
- 02:08 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Sorry I didn't make this connection sooner. OK, so we've never implemented a solution. Ovidiu, please move forward wi...
- 02:03 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Sorry I didn't realize this earlier, the output parameter precision for fields is covered by #2295.
- 02:00 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Ovidiu Maxiniuc wrote:
> It seems like this case was somehow overlooked, with revno 10895 of main trunk it displays:... - 01:49 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Ovidiu Maxiniuc wrote:
> The problem is that we need to temporarily overwrite the precision of the database field un... - 01:25 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- It seems like this case was somehow overlooked, with revno 10895 of main trunk it displays:...
- 12:42 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Eric Faulhaber wrote:
> Ovidiu, please try this testcase without your changes applied and track back to where it bro... - 12:40 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Ovidiu, please try this testcase without your changes applied and track back to where it broke (which may be part of ...
- 12:33 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Ovidiu,
it's been a while since I was playing with extents.
The case you refer to shows that 4GL doesn't propag... - 12:32 PM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Hynek,
I found in one of your testcase files the following test:... - 09:35 AM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- The 2592 branch was rebased with 10895 main trunk and now it is at revno 10906.
07/09/2015
- 11:37 AM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- Ovidiu Maxiniuc wrote:
> ...
> Since the @rv@ is really the same object as in first call, the fields will be overwr... - 10:15 AM Bug #2592: improve support for implicit type conversions
- It looks to me that line 4551 in 2592/10903 will only check for types errors: both argument and formal parameter to b...
Also available in: Atom