Activity
From 11/11/2019 to 12/10/2019
12/10/2019
- 06:59 PM Bug #4455: Extent field on unsubscripted next-prompt not converted properly
- Code Review Task Branch 4207a Revisions 11353 - 11354
The changes are good.
The only problem is the range exten... - 06:10 PM Bug #4455: Extent field on unsubscripted next-prompt not converted properly
- h1. Updated
Below are my updates and findings
h2. rules/annotations/progress_templates.tpl
I have added this... - 05:24 PM Bug #4455: Extent field on unsubscripted next-prompt not converted properly
- Greg Shah wrote:
> > On line 20, I don't have any subscript. This results in AST generation of:
>
> Are you sayin... - 05:15 PM Bug #4455: Extent field on unsubscripted next-prompt not converted properly
- > On line 20, I don't have any subscript. This results in AST generation of:
Are you saying that the @input/extent... - 04:28 PM Bug #4455: Extent field on unsubscripted next-prompt not converted properly
- +*New Testcases*+
I have updated the testcase to not use the @p2j_test.df@, instead using TEMP-TABLE. I also added a... - 03:42 PM Bug #4455: Extent field on unsubscripted next-prompt not converted properly
- While building up a testcase to use variables instead of fields, I noticed this situation. It may be a red herring, b...
- 01:01 PM Bug #4455: Extent field on unsubscripted next-prompt not converted properly
- Please remove the @hidden="true"@. Otherwise it won't work.
> Is the @implied_extent_first_element@ name accurat... - 12:58 PM Bug #4455: Extent field on unsubscripted next-prompt not converted properly
- Greg Shah wrote:
> Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> > I think you need to graft only the LBRACKET portion. As a side no... - 12:14 PM Bug #4455: Extent field on unsubscripted next-prompt not converted properly
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> I think you need to graft only the LBRACKET portion. As a side note, the fix should be ... - 12:13 PM Bug #4455: Extent field on unsubscripted next-prompt not converted properly
- This:...
- 12:02 PM Bug #4455: Extent field on unsubscripted next-prompt not converted properly
- I think you need to graft only the LBRACKET portion. As a side note, the fix should be generic for any extent - be i...
- 11:58 AM Bug #4455: Extent field on unsubscripted next-prompt not converted properly
- Greg Shah wrote:
> There is no documentation/task for "templatizing".
>
> I think the annotations can all be left... - 11:40 AM Bug #4455: Extent field on unsubscripted next-prompt not converted properly
- There is no documentation/task for "templatizing".
I think the annotations can all be left out. The line and colu... - 11:28 AM Bug #4455: Extent field on unsubscripted next-prompt not converted properly
- Greg Shah wrote:
> Correct, so long as the child of the @kw_next_pmt@ is the field/var itself. For example, for any... - 10:02 AM Bug #4455: Extent field on unsubscripted next-prompt not converted properly
- Correct, so long as the child of the @kw_next_pmt@ is the field/var itself. For example, for anything with a @form_i...
- 06:49 PM Bug #4462: NOW with comparison operators
- There is a bug in FWD, where a comparison like @dt > NOW@ (where @dt@ is datetime) fails with @Incompatible data type...
- 06:38 PM Bug #4462 (New): NOW with comparison operators
- 06:32 PM Feature #3854: update appserver support with PASOE features
- I was looking for some details on the support of the @server-connection-context@ attribute is. I looked at the code, ...
- 06:29 PM Bug #4461: DST and add-interval
- There's a bug in FWD which is exposed when a DST boundary is reached:...
- 06:17 PM Bug #4461 (New): DST and add-interval
12/09/2019
- 06:14 PM Bug #4455: Extent field on unsubscripted next-prompt not converted properly
- Greg Shah wrote:
> I'm not suggesting doing it in core conversion. The alternative idea was to add @next-prompt@ to... - 05:46 PM Bug #4455: Extent field on unsubscripted next-prompt not converted properly
- I'm not suggesting doing it in core conversion. The alternative idea was to add @next-prompt@ to the list of normal ...
- 05:39 PM Bug #4455: Extent field on unsubscripted next-prompt not converted properly
- At core conversion time may be too late to do this, without having to go and 'hack' the frame generation to exclude t...
- 05:31 PM Bug #4455: Extent field on unsubscripted next-prompt not converted properly
- The primary issue is that @next-prompt@ is not honored as a statement in which we do array expansion (because we alwa...
- 05:23 PM Bug #4455: Extent field on unsubscripted next-prompt not converted properly
- > Note that if you remove define shared frame person. the testcase is successful.
This is not the right way to say... - 05:20 PM Bug #4455: Extent field on unsubscripted next-prompt not converted properly
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Roger, the @ public FillInWidget widgetSchedule();@ line doesn't seem right, to be gen... - 05:00 PM Bug #4455: Extent field on unsubscripted next-prompt not converted properly
- Roger, the @ public FillInWidget widgetSchedule();@ line doesn't seem right, to be generated. You say that the fir...
- 04:54 PM Bug #4455: Extent field on unsubscripted next-prompt not converted properly
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> h1. Description
>
> When @next-prompt@ is passed an extent field of a shared frame, but n... - 02:18 PM Bug #4455: Extent field on unsubscripted next-prompt not converted properly
- h1. Description
When @next-prompt@ is passed an extent field of a shared frame, but no subscript, we generate an u... - 01:00 PM Bug #4455 (Closed): Extent field on unsubscripted next-prompt not converted properly
- 02:48 PM Bug #4427 (WIP): Unable to convert keyword input when used to index into an extent
- 02:43 PM Bug #4423 (WIP): Incorrect buffer scoping when same buffer name used as a parameter to internal p...
12/06/2019
- 05:33 PM Bug #4453: Handling of filename with quotation mark broken in control_flow.rules
- Greg Shah wrote:
> [...]
>
> I disagree with this. If all three are -1 then the @progressToJavaString()@ is NOT ... - 05:16 PM Bug #4453: Handling of filename with quotation mark broken in control_flow.rules
- ...
- 05:01 PM Bug #4453: Handling of filename with quotation mark broken in control_flow.rules
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Rev 10509 was part of #1634 - there's lots of discussion for tilde and quote chars, in p... - 04:37 PM Bug #4453: Handling of filename with quotation mark broken in control_flow.rules
- Rev 10509 was part of #1634 - there's lots of discussion for tilde and quote chars, in paths.
- 04:15 PM Bug #4453: Handling of filename with quotation mark broken in control_flow.rules
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> And the implication for my 'garbage suffix' misdirection: if the 4GL code (like @RUN a.p... - 03:35 PM Bug #4453: Handling of filename with quotation mark broken in control_flow.rules
- And the implication for my 'garbage suffix' misdirection: if the 4GL code (like @RUN a.p_garbage@) is tested only wit...
- 03:03 PM Bug #4453: Handling of filename with quotation mark broken in control_flow.rules
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Roger Borrello wrote:
> > When a file name is @runit.p"@ the Java should be @"runit.p\"... - 03:00 PM Bug #4453: Handling of filename with quotation mark broken in control_flow.rules
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> When a file name is @runit.p"@ the Java should be @"runit.p\""@.
Argh, I don't understand, ... - 02:55 PM Bug #4453: Handling of filename with quotation mark broken in control_flow.rules
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> Roger Borrello wrote:
> > h1. Description
> >
> > A filename with a quotation mark (albe... - 02:39 PM Bug #4453: Handling of filename with quotation mark broken in control_flow.rules
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> h1. Description
>
> A filename with a quotation mark (albeit a typo) is not processed pro... - 02:38 PM Bug #4453: Handling of filename with quotation mark broken in control_flow.rules
- h1. Description
A filename with a quotation mark (albeit a typo) is not processed properly.
h2. Testcase
@ru... - 02:33 PM Bug #4453 (WIP): Handling of filename with quotation mark broken in control_flow.rules
12/05/2019
- 02:40 PM Feature #3853: implement LOG-MANAGER runtime
- As part of this task, we should ensure that the default appserver logging that occurs in the 4GL is fully supported i...
12/04/2019
- 07:38 AM Feature #3855: implement equivalent support for REST (classic appserver, PASOE REST and WEB trans...
- Marian, my questions related to @WebResponseWriter@ are:
* when is the flush happening? What happens if you try to w... - 05:51 AM Feature #3855: implement equivalent support for REST (classic appserver, PASOE REST and WEB trans...
- Greg Shah wrote:
> From Constantin:
>
> > We need some help in understanding the @WebHandler@ APIs, but not from ... - 02:12 AM Feature #3853: implement LOG-MANAGER runtime
- Greg Shah wrote:
> I have these questions about the content and formatting of the log entries.
>
> * Is @P-999999... - 01:56 AM Feature #3868: customer servlet integration/support
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> We need a way to force Jetty @WebAppContext@ to use its own jasper libraries, instead of...
12/03/2019
- 05:16 PM Feature #3868: customer servlet integration/support
- 3809e rev 11414 contains changes to add @GenericWebServer@ APIs to load a WAR file in a standalone Jetty server, in t...
- 05:05 PM Feature #2135: implement COPY-LOB language statement
- The changes are in 3809e rev 11414. There are still some issues not addressed (see the TODOs in the code)m and #2135...
- 01:43 PM Bug #4433: Problem with text concat
- I think it is OK to include this in 3820a.
- 12:15 PM Bug #4433: Problem with text concat
- Greg Shah wrote:
> Good point, don't add the @outer:@ label, just add the @inner:@ label and references.
Is it th... - 10:09 AM Bug #4433: Problem with text concat
- Good point, don't add the @outer:@ label, just add the @inner:@ label and references.
- 10:08 AM Bug #4433: Problem with text concat
- Greg Shah wrote:
> Yes, I think this will work correctly.
>
> Although a careful reading of the code is quite cle... - 08:30 AM Bug #4433: Problem with text concat
- Yes, I think this will work correctly.
Although a careful reading of the code is quite clear about the behavior, I... - 12:38 PM Feature #3855: implement equivalent support for REST (classic appserver, PASOE REST and WEB trans...
- From Constantin:
> We need some help in understanding the @WebHandler@ APIs, but not from the @WebHandler.cls@, he... - 10:26 AM Feature #3853: implement LOG-MANAGER runtime
- Consider the following log output examples....
- 07:07 PM Bug #4427: Unable to convert keyword input when used to index into an extent
- -*This has been fixed in 4207a-11349*-
12/02/2019
- 04:55 PM Bug #4433: Problem with text concat
- Greg Shah wrote:
> Yes, it would be possible by using @get-string()@ on @memptr@ or @raw@ or with certain forms of s... - 03:41 PM Bug #4433: Problem with text concat
- Yes, it would be possible by using @get-string()@ on @memptr@ or @raw@ or with certain forms of string literals. See...
- 03:25 PM Bug #4433: Problem with text concat
- Greg Shah wrote:
> In that scenario, the value will be a @BaseDataType@ and if it is the first operand, then the pro... - 01:30 PM Bug #4433: Problem with text concat
- In that scenario, the value will be a @BaseDataType@ and if it is the first operand, then the proposed change in the ...
- 01:14 PM Bug #4433: Problem with text concat
- Greg Shah wrote:
> I thought we were discussing the approach from #4433-6 in which the code change was not at conver... - 01:09 PM Bug #4433: Problem with text concat
- I thought we were discussing the approach from #4433-6 in which the code change was not at conversion but only exists...
- 11:55 AM Bug #4433: Problem with text concat
- Greg Shah wrote:
> The first @character@ operand uses @getValue()@ instead of @safeValue()@ in @TextOps.concat()@.
... - 11:11 AM Bug #4433: Problem with text concat
- The first @character@ operand uses @getValue()@ instead of @safeValue()@ in @TextOps.concat()@.
- 11:08 AM Bug #4433: Problem with text concat
- Greg Shah wrote:
> So then the algorithm needs to be slightly different because the leftmost operand is treated diff... - 10:36 AM Bug #4433: Problem with text concat
- So then the algorithm needs to be slightly different because the leftmost operand is treated differently than the sub...
- 10:33 AM Bug #4433: Problem with text concat
- Greg Shah wrote:
> I'm asking about in the 4GL. Can the buffer-value sub-expression appear as the leftmost operand ... - 08:43 AM Bug #4433: Problem with text concat
- I'm asking about in the 4GL. Can the buffer-value sub-expression appear as the leftmost operand of the @+@ concatena...
- 12:02 PM Bug #4427: Unable to convert keyword input when used to index into an extent
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> This same testcase has the issue, so buffers are not the only thing leading to it. It could ... - 09:16 AM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> This is fixed in 11347. Please test again.
Both testcases (@tablehandle_parameter_wi... - 09:07 AM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- And another reason why @parmrefid@ was also incorrect: a var can be referenced by multiple parameters, not just one.
- 09:05 AM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- OK, that works for me.
- 09:05 AM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Greg Shah wrote:
> Code Review Task Branch 4207a Revisions 11346-11347
>
> Overall, the changes look good.
>
>... - 09:01 AM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Code Review Task Branch 4207a Revisions 11346-11347
Overall, the changes look good.
One question: in @scope_pro... - 08:13 AM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- This is fixed in 11347. Please test again.
11/30/2019
- 10:07 AM Bug #4433: Problem with text concat
- Greg Shah wrote:
> Can a POLY value ever be passed as the first operand? If not then this is probably the correct a...
11/29/2019
- 06:15 PM Bug #4433: Problem with text concat
- Can a POLY value ever be passed as the first operand? If not then this is probably the correct approach.
- 05:49 PM Bug #4433: Problem with text concat
- Greg Shah wrote:
> I guess we can do that safely, as long as we document this clearly in the javadoc. The only down... - 05:41 PM Bug #4433: Problem with text concat
- I guess we can do that safely, as long as we document this clearly in the javadoc. The only downside is that it can ...
- 05:11 PM Bug #4433: Problem with text concat
- Question: why not do this automatically at runtime? If the argument is not a Java String or a character, then automat...
- 05:08 PM Bug #4433: Problem with text concat
- Consider that the following code is not valid (it does not compile in the 4GL):
@message "text " + 1234567890.@
... - 04:13 PM Bug #4433: Problem with text concat
- From Vladimir:
> I am not sure which is the right way to fix it. According to the Javadocs, the @toString()@ metho... - 12:24 PM Bug #4433: Problem with text concat
- The following code snippet runs smoothly in Progress....
- 12:18 PM Bug #4433 (New): Problem with text concat
- 10:43 AM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> I am OOO today, as well, but wanted to take a quick look at this update. I did a full build,... - 10:41 AM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Roger Borrello wrote:
> > Sorry for the lack of response. Today was Thanksgiving in the... - 06:09 AM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> Sorry for the lack of response. Today was Thanksgiving in the US.
Happy Thanksgiving! :)
... - 10:31 PM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Anyway, the changes are in 4207a rev 11346. Greg, please review.
Sorry for the lack ...
11/28/2019
- 05:22 PM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Anyway, the changes are in 4207a rev 11346. Greg, please review.
- 05:05 PM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Greg, I've fixed this in the conversion rules (it was not a parser problem in the end). But before checking what it ...
- 02:40 PM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Sorry, I don't remember anything about that.
- 02:20 PM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Stanislav, I see that you've added testcases related to @PARAMETER TABLE-HANDLE [FOR]@ (like @th-for-regular.p@). Wa...
- 01:28 PM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- I've been trying to understand how @TABLE-HANDLE@ and @TABLE-HANDLE FOR@ behave - looks like they are not equivalent....
11/27/2019
- 01:24 PM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> I am trying to dig into #4427 at the same time. Are you able grab 4207a to help? It would be... - 12:17 PM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Roger Borrello wrote:
> > Here's what's in the parameter section for the _good_ version... - 12:07 PM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> Here's what's in the parameter section for the _good_ version:
The @vardef@ annotation is s... - 12:05 PM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Roger Borrello wrote:
> > ... or does @rule.tracing=true@ go someplace else?
> Before ... - 11:50 AM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> ... or does @rule.tracing=true@ go someplace else?
Before the main class, like this:
@java... - 11:49 AM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Roger, there is no @vardef@ annotation in the case in #4424-13 (the AST is from the full... - 11:39 AM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Roger, there is no @vardef@ annotation in the case in #4424-13 (the AST is from the full conversion, right?) Add @-Dr...
- 11:30 AM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Roger Borrello wrote:
> > Those 2 lines can be replaced with @define input parameter ta... - 11:27 AM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> Those 2 lines can be replaced with @define input parameter table-handle gh.@ and you will ge... - 11:26 AM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Roger Borrello wrote:
> > Note that in this testcase, the @gh@ is used in both a @defin... - 11:24 AM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> Note that in this testcase, the @gh@ is used in both a @define variable@ and @define input p... - 11:23 AM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> > They fix another issue, I thought it was related to this. So... - 11:20 AM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> They fix another issue, I thought it was related to this. So looks like there's another... - 11:16 AM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- They fix another issue, I thought it was related to this. So looks like there's another case to fix. Please post the...
- 11:15 AM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Roger, take these files from 3809e:
> [...]
>
> They are built from trunk, so is saf... - 10:45 AM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Roger, take these files from 3809e:...
- 10:18 AM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- +*Converted code fails to compile*+...
- 10:11 AM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- This fix enables the @TABLE-HANDLE FOR <existing_handle_var>@ use case. We already have support in conversion (to se...
- 09:57 AM Bug #4424 (Test): Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in ...
- The fix for this is in 4207a revision 11344.
- 12:48 PM Bug #4427: Unable to convert keyword input when used to index into an extent
- This same testcase has the issue, so buffers are not the only thing leading to it. It could be 2 separate issues, or ...
- 07:31 PM Bug #4427: Unable to convert keyword input when used to index into an extent
- The regression is fixed in rev 11343. Now this testcase fails again. Success!
- 11:12 AM Bug #4425: Lost frame_id when converting code with missing field names to update
- Greg Shah wrote:
> Sure.
Updated in @4207a-11345@
- 10:47 AM Bug #4425: Lost frame_id when converting code with missing field names to update
- Sure.
- 10:11 AM Bug #4425: Lost frame_id when converting code with missing field names to update
- Greg Shah wrote:
> This change caused a bad regression that dropped all prompt-for/set/update statements. Fixed in ... - 09:58 AM Bug #4425 (Test): Lost frame_id when converting code with missing field names to update
- 07:30 PM Bug #4425: Lost frame_id when converting code with missing field names to update
- This change caused a bad regression that dropped all prompt-for/set/update statements. Fixed in rev 11343.
11/26/2019
- 06:06 PM Bug #4427: Unable to convert keyword input when used to index into an extent
- It is missing all output for this:...
- 06:02 PM Bug #4427: Unable to convert keyword input when used to index into an extent
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> I cannot duplicate the issue using 4207a-11342 using the testcase nor customer code.
Here... - 03:53 PM Bug #4427: Unable to convert keyword input when used to index into an extent
- I cannot duplicate the issue using 4207a-11342 using the testcase nor customer code.
- 05:36 PM Feature #2135: implement COPY-LOB language statement
- Eric Faulhaber wrote:
> First CLOB initialization is sticky, even if followed by a later assignment?
Not the initia... - 05:34 PM Feature #2135: implement COPY-LOB language statement
- First CLOB initialization is sticky, even if followed by a later assignment? Does that hold if the @""@ and @?@ initi...
- 05:07 PM Feature #2135: implement COPY-LOB language statement
- Eric Faulhaber wrote:
> These are all runtime bugs, right? Both the conversion and runtime were meant to handle thes... - 01:25 PM Feature #2135: implement COPY-LOB language statement
- These are all runtime bugs, right? Both the conversion and runtime were meant to handle these permutations, but runti...
- 12:49 PM Feature #2135: implement COPY-LOB language statement
- Eric Faulhaber wrote:
> Well, then again, look at @Text.assign(Text value)@. It stores the @String@ object inside th... - 12:18 PM Feature #2135: implement COPY-LOB language statement
- Well, then again, look at @Text.assign(Text value)@. It stores the @String@ object inside the @Text@ passed to it, no...
- 12:14 PM Feature #2135: implement COPY-LOB language statement
- Hm. That check may have survived from an earlier implementation. I think you are right.
- 01:49 AM Feature #2135: implement COPY-LOB language statement
- The @value == data@ I don't think can ever be true, as when we assign a byte array, we copy it to another instance. ...
- 10:41 AM Bug #4425: Lost frame_id when converting code with missing field names to update
- Greg Shah wrote:
> The fix is in branch 4207a revision 11342.
+*Added additional testcases to demonstrate @prompt... - 10:28 AM Bug #4425: Lost frame_id when converting code with missing field names to update
- The fix is in branch 4207a revision 11342.
- 09:37 AM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- Note that reversing the lines in the testcase alters the behavior in Progress. ...
11/25/2019
- 04:58 PM Feature #2135: implement COPY-LOB language statement
- This was meant to be a quick exit if there was nothing to do. Note the rest of the block:...
- 04:53 PM Feature #2135: implement COPY-LOB language statement
- Eric Faulhaber wrote:
> I suspect that was meant as an optimization to preempt unnecessary work, but I'm not sure wh... - 04:07 PM Feature #2135: implement COPY-LOB language statement
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> I think I understand now - the @overlay@ option (which is 'active' in FWD only if @offse... - 03:38 PM Feature #2135: implement COPY-LOB language statement
- I think I understand now - the @overlay@ option (which is 'active' in FWD only if @offset@ is non-null) is not treate...
- 01:56 PM Feature #2135: implement COPY-LOB language statement
- Eric Faulhaber wrote:
> The idea was that you have an existing @longchar@ instance which has data in it and a COPY-L... - 01:54 PM Feature #2135: implement COPY-LOB language statement
- The idea was that you have an existing @longchar@ instance which has data in it and a COPY-LOB (overlay) operation se...
- 04:10 AM Feature #2135: implement COPY-LOB language statement
- Eric, what is the use case documented like this in @longchar.write@:...
11/22/2019
- 04:42 PM Bug #4427: Unable to convert keyword input when used to index into an extent
- h1. General
Expression execution error when there is an @input@ statement withing the brackets of an extent which ... - 04:31 PM Bug #4427 (Closed): Unable to convert keyword input when used to index into an extent
- 03:46 PM Bug #4425: Lost frame_id when converting code with missing field names to update
- h1. General
A typo in code resulted in @update@ not having any field names passed to it. This creates a conversion... - 03:38 PM Bug #4425 (Closed): Lost frame_id when converting code with missing field names to update
- 03:11 PM Bug #4423: Incorrect buffer scoping when same buffer name used as a parameter to internal procedure
- It probably should only be set when this is a parameter.
This change is dangerous so it will need some regression ... - 03:07 PM Bug #4423: Incorrect buffer scoping when same buffer name used as a parameter to internal procedure
- Greg Shah wrote:
> I think it needs to do that for regular buffer definitions, but I suspect that buffer parameters ... - 02:45 PM Bug #4423: Incorrect buffer scoping when same buffer name used as a parameter to internal procedure
- I think it needs to do that for regular buffer definitions, but I suspect that buffer parameters should not be propag...
- 02:29 PM Bug #4423: Incorrect buffer scoping when same buffer name used as a parameter to internal procedure
- Greg, the issue is with this code, in @progress.g:procedure@ like 11198:...
- 02:20 PM Bug #4423: Incorrect buffer scoping when same buffer name used as a parameter to internal procedure
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> The @bufname@ annotation is incorrect:
> [...]
> instead of the correct one:
> [...]
... - 02:14 PM Bug #4423: Incorrect buffer scoping when same buffer name used as a parameter to internal procedure
- The @bufname@ annotation is incorrect:...
- 01:49 PM Bug #4423: Incorrect buffer scoping when same buffer name used as a parameter to internal procedure
- h1. General
Conversion error occurs when dealing with a shared buffer name that also happens to be defined as a pa... - 01:21 PM Bug #4423 (Closed): Incorrect buffer scoping when same buffer name used as a parameter to interna...
- 03:08 PM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- The solution is to add code in annotations that will detect this case. When found, it should:
* delete the @FOR@ ... - 02:58 PM Bug #4424: Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included in def par...
- h1. General
We found usual syntax in code where the keyword @for@ was included as a qualifier to the @def input pa... - 02:08 PM Bug #4424 (Closed): Additional def var needed to receive table handle when keyword FOR included i...
11/21/2019
- 04:59 PM Feature #3867: direct java class access from 4GL code
- In @BlockManager.topLevelBlock()@, it seems like this code should be aware of @BLOCK-LEVEL/ROUTINE-LEVEL ON ERROR UND...
11/20/2019
- 02:56 AM Feature #3753: I18N additions
- We add tests for translation using Chinese language.
For Chinese language we have to use UTF-8 code page for all inv...
11/19/2019
- 05:37 PM Feature #3867: direct java class access from 4GL code
- Greg Shah wrote:
> Any catch block directly inside any top level block will not be parented at a @prog.inner_block@.... - 05:34 PM Feature #3867: direct java class access from 4GL code
- A testcase like this:...
- 05:28 PM Feature #3867: direct java class access from 4GL code
- At this time, the 4GL catch block is incompatible with Java's checked exceptions. This is due to the fact that we ar...
- 02:24 AM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Igor Skornyakov wrote:
> Constantin. I understand that the top priority for me at this moment is #4363 and #4364. Is... - 02:23 AM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Thank you, Marian.
Constantin. I understand that the top priority for me at this moment is #4363 and #4364. Is thi... - 01:36 AM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Igor Skornyakov wrote:
> Regarding the @domainAccessCode@. This is indeed a secret data and is not serialized. I'me ...
11/18/2019
- 05:23 PM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Igor Skornyakov wrote:
> Constantin. I have to recall the details. I will provide my thoughts tomorrow. Please note,... - 03:54 PM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Igor, I have two issues:
> * if you try to use @set-client@ a second time, on a already... - 03:42 PM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Igor, I have two issues:
* if you try to use @set-client@ a second time, on a already auth DB (with the same client-... - 02:52 PM Feature #4417: features to allow direct usage of _progres (and related executables) to be support...
- Customers use @_progres@ (and other related executables) to launch 4GL sessions. oday, in each project a task must b...
- 02:47 PM Feature #4417 (New): features to allow direct usage of _progres (and related executables) to be s...
11/14/2019
- 08:59 AM Feature #3753: I18N additions
- To run tests, follow steps should be done:
Create a database named *tran* in folder testcases/tran_man/db
Load de...
11/13/2019
- 04:18 PM Feature #3867: direct java class access from 4GL code
- Task branch 4069a has been merged to trunk as revision 11339. This is the majority of the necessary support. There ...
Also available in: Atom