Activity
From 12/20/2019 to 01/18/2020
01/17/2020
- 12:01 PM Bug #4476: Shared frame does not get @ widget method generated
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> We are only iterating through wlist once, because we no longer add the don't add @ as a ... - 11:57 AM Bug #4476: Shared frame does not get @ widget method generated
- We are only iterating through wlist once, because we no longer add the don't add @ as a widget, presumably when i...
- 11:45 AM Bug #4476: Shared frame does not get @ widget method generated
- Given the failed regression testing, I'm revisiting with this testcase:...
01/16/2020
- 04:46 PM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Constantin: please review.
- 04:45 PM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Greg Shah wrote:
> Is this ready for a code review?
I think so. - 04:40 PM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Is this ready for a code review?
- 05:36 AM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- @VALIDATE-SEAL@ is fixed in 4335a revision 11475.
- 02:50 PM Bug #4484: Accumulator confusion using same field for count and total
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Roger Borrello wrote:
> > Hi Constantin... fyi my regression testing was successful wit... - 01:42 PM Bug #4484: Accumulator confusion using same field for count and total
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> Hi Constantin... fyi my regression testing was successful with that code removed. What was t... - 01:17 PM Bug #4160: Arrays assigment issue
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> The conversion fixes are in 4207a rev 11360. It also moves the @ExtentExpr@ to anon cla... - 01:00 PM Bug #4123 (Test): conversion generates incorrect java code for Extent statement
- This is basically a duplicate of the issue #4160 and the fix is the same.
- 12:45 PM Bug #4123: conversion generates incorrect java code for Extent statement
- Greg Shah wrote:
> In what branch and revision can you recreate this problem (i.e. is this in trunk 11319)?
I jus... - 09:46 AM Bug #4476: Shared frame does not get @ widget method generated
- > Throw a few test samples in here and we can see.
That is your task. - 09:36 AM Bug #4476: Shared frame does not get @ widget method generated
- Greg Shah wrote:
> Hmm, this is worse than what we already knew (which was really bad).
>
> Questions:
>
> * D... - 09:33 AM Bug #4476: Shared frame does not get @ widget method generated
- Hmm, this is worse than what we already knew (which was really bad).
Questions:
* Does this happen for any @@@ ... - 09:27 AM Bug #4476: Shared frame does not get @ widget method generated
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Roger Borrello wrote:
> > Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> > > Roger, please change @mymess... - 09:25 AM Bug #4476: Shared frame does not get @ widget method generated
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> > Roger, please change @mymess@ to be a decimal and use some si... - 09:24 AM Bug #4476: Shared frame does not get @ widget method generated
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Roger, please change @mymess@ to be a decimal and use some similar @Missing value@ - I w... - 09:19 AM Bug #4476: Shared frame does not get @ widget method generated
- Roger, please change @mymess@ to be a decimal and use some similar @Missing value@ - I wonder if @@@ option just form...
- 09:10 AM Bug #4476: Shared frame does not get @ widget method generated
- I just wanted to make a note that the 4GL behavior when including conflicting formatting between the variable definit...
01/15/2020
- 05:45 PM Bug #4476: Shared frame does not get @ widget method generated
- *Updated convert/frame_generator.xml in 4207a-11378*
We need to look at our parent node for @ base-field, instead ... - 04:13 PM Bug #4476: Shared frame does not get @ widget method generated
- Greg Shah wrote:
> This is an expected consequence of the change. We are now creating the widget from the child of ... - 03:56 PM Bug #4476: Shared frame does not get @ widget method generated
- This is an expected consequence of the change. We are now creating the widget from the child of @AT@ instead of at t...
- 03:40 PM Bug #4476: Shared frame does not get @ widget method generated
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> Roger Borrello wrote:
> > I see a difference in the generated frame definition between trun... - 01:31 PM Bug #4476: Shared frame does not get @ widget method generated
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> I see a difference in the generated frame definition between trunk, and this revision.
>
... - 11:02 AM Bug #4476: Shared frame does not get @ widget method generated
- I see a difference in the generated frame definition between trunk, and this revision.
I modified the testcase @at... - 05:42 PM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- @VALIDATE-SEAL@ is almost fixed, but it appears the @LOAD-DOMAINS@ is broken. Will fix it tomorrow.
- 01:50 PM Bug #4484: Accumulator confusion using same field for count and total
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> Roger Borrello wrote:
> > The code no longer creates a field reference when there is a @[@ ... - 11:12 AM Feature #3867: direct java class access from 4GL code
- Greg Shah wrote:
> I looked into this case. I think you are talking about @ladder-safety-gen.p@ where it references... - 10:13 AM Feature #3867 (Test): direct java class access from 4GL code
- 10:12 AM Feature #3867: direct java class access from 4GL code
- Hynek Cihlar wrote:
> Greg Shah wrote:
> > Constantin/Hynek: Do you know of any other critical bugs or missing feat...
01/14/2020
- 03:57 PM Bug #4484: Accumulator confusion using same field for count and total
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> The code no longer creates a field reference when there is a @[@ downpath:
>
> [...]
>
... - 02:17 PM Bug #4484: Accumulator confusion using same field for count and total
- The code no longer creates a field reference when there is a @[@ downpath:...
- 02:12 PM Bug #4484 (WIP): Accumulator confusion using same field for count and total
- 09:15 AM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Manually merged updates into 4335a revision 11469.
- 09:13 AM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Igor Skornyakov wrote:
> I will first merge into 4335a and continue in it. Is it OK?
Yes.
- 08:58 AM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Yes, please do. And please go through https://documentation.progress.com/output/ua/Open... - 08:56 AM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Igor Skornyakov wrote:
> Oops. It seems that I've overlooked this, sorry. I have to add a corresponding test and upd... - 08:53 AM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Igor Skornyakov wrote:
> > Maybe it is better to just manually merge the changes as the... - 08:42 AM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Igor Skornyakov wrote:
> Maybe it is better to just manually merge the changes as they affect only two classes?
Yes... - 08:22 AM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> And if is an unknown value?
An error 4065 is generated.
- 08:20 AM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Igor, I'm OK with the changes. This can be merged with 4335a.
Constantin. 3810e wa... - 08:17 AM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Igor Skornyakov wrote:
> Constantin. In 4GL the @domainAccessCode@ parameter is mandatory for the @SEAL@ call.
And ... - 08:15 AM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Igor, I'm OK with the changes. This can be merged with 4335a.
>
> On a side note, in... - 08:04 AM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Igor, I'm OK with the changes. This can be merged with 4335a.
On a side note, in @validateSeal@ I left this comme...
01/13/2020
- 07:17 AM Feature #3254: add support for running 4GL on multiple threads in a single session
- Greg,
I think we should support the thread "JOIN" concept by using an additional option @AS-THREAD [SET handle] [ON-...
01/12/2020
- 02:05 PM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- The issue #3810-407 resolved in 3810e revision 11342.
BTW: it appears the @PRIMARY_PASSPHRASE@ attribute value is ig... - 12:00 PM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- @SET-DB-CLIENT@ for the principal in a @LOGIN@ state validates only @DOMAIN-NAME@ and @DOMAIN-ACCESS-CODE@ (using MAC...
- 11:03 AM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- With 3810e revision 11341, the @SET-DB-CLIENT@ with the imported sealed principal works fine. So the issue described ...
01/10/2020
- 05:32 PM Feature #3254 (WIP): add support for running 4GL on multiple threads in a single session
- To create a new thread, I was planning to add an optional @AS-THREAD [SET handle]@ extension to the @RUN@ statement. ...
- 04:10 AM Feature #3867: direct java class access from 4GL code
- Greg Shah wrote:
> I believe that we are at a good "first pass" level of support here. A future improvement would b... - 01:12 AM Feature #3867: direct java class access from 4GL code
- Greg Shah wrote:
> Constantin/Hynek: Do you know of any other critical bugs or missing features before we can accept...
01/09/2020
- 05:56 PM Feature #3254: add support for running 4GL on multiple threads in a single session
- Understood. To implement "temp-tables" that are shared across threads we would have to implement a multi-user databa...
- 05:17 PM Feature #3254: add support for running 4GL on multiple threads in a single session
- To clarify, you can access a persistent table across threads, but not over the same connection. A temp-table actually...
- 05:16 PM Feature #3254: add support for running 4GL on multiple threads in a single session
- Greg Shah wrote:
> Since JDBC connections cannot be shared across more than one thread, the current temp-table appro... - 05:09 PM Feature #3254: add support for running 4GL on multiple threads in a single session
- Some months ago, Eric noted to me that sharing temp-tables will be a problem since they are private to a single JDBC ...
- 04:28 PM Feature #3867: direct java class access from 4GL code
- I believe that we are at a good "first pass" level of support here. A future improvement would be to support inherit...
- 04:24 PM Feature #3867: direct java class access from 4GL code
- I just committed revision 11467 to branch 4335a (which is derived from 3809e revision 11466). This revision provides...
01/06/2020
- 02:06 PM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Well, I understand what was wrong in my setup. I had @large_customer_application.jar@ in my project classpath. Now th...
- 02:00 PM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Igor Skornyakov wrote:
> Eric Faulhaber wrote:
> > Does @com/goldencode/testcases/dmo/_meta/meta_table_ddl.sql@ exi... - 01:56 PM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Eric Faulhaber wrote:
> Does @com/goldencode/testcases/dmo/_meta/meta_table_ddl.sql@ exist in your application jar f... - 01:40 PM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Does @com/goldencode/testcases/dmo/_meta/meta_table_ddl.sql@ exist in your application jar file?
- 01:21 PM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Eric Faulhaber wrote:
> Igor Skornyakov wrote:
> > Please note that I still have no solution for problem #3810-413.... - 12:46 PM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Igor Skornyakov wrote:
> Please note that I still have no solution for problem #3810-413. Any help will be highly ap... - 05:37 AM Bug #4160: Arrays assigment issue
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> That was not enough detail to get me going. I believe Greg thought it would be an exercise i...
01/03/2020
- 01:49 PM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- The extended @uast/security/export-cp.p@ test produces the compatible results in 4GL and FWD branch 3810e rev. 11341....
- 01:52 AM Feature #2135: implement COPY-LOB language statement
- Eric Faulhaber wrote:
> * What is the structure/size/layout of the BOM for file input/output?
There is no special...
01/02/2020
- 01:07 PM Bug #4476 (Test): Shared frame does not get @ widget method generated
- 12:12 PM Bug #4476 (WIP): Shared frame does not get @ widget method generated
- 12:11 PM Bug #4476: Shared frame does not get @ widget method generated
- Greg Shah wrote:
> > but doesn't myat have to be defined properly, too?
>
> In the working case, the variable is ... - 10:23 AM Bug #4476: Shared frame does not get @ widget method generated
- > but doesn't myat have to be defined properly, too?
In the working case, the variable is not defined as an inline... - 10:15 AM Bug #4476: Shared frame does not get @ widget method generated
- Greg Shah wrote:
> That is probably not related. The issue will be the tree structure under the @KW_FORM@. The @FO... - 10:07 AM Bug #4476: Shared frame does not get @ widget method generated
- That is probably not related. The issue will be the tree structure under the @KW_FORM@. The @FORM_ITEM@ related to ...
- 10:02 AM Bug #4476: Shared frame does not get @ widget method generated
- Comparing the AST generated for the broken case (@shared_frame_at_label.p@) against the correct case (@shared_frame_a...
12/31/2019
- 03:04 PM Bug #4476: Shared frame does not get @ widget method generated
- This is data from a correctly built testcase, which does *not* create the fields in the from on-the-fly.
@sharedfr... - 02:14 PM Bug #4476: Shared frame does not get @ widget method generated
- Let me recap what is generated by the pair of testcases in #note-1 :
@sharedframes/SharedFrameAtLabel.java@... - 12:00 PM Bug #4484 (Test): Accumulator confusion using same field for count and total
- 12:00 PM Bug #4483 (Test): Unable to use logical variable check in underline statement
- 12:00 PM Bug #4482 (Test): Enable/Disable with empty EXCEPT causes issues
- 11:59 AM Bug #4480 (Test): Extent does not become fixed when there is an initial list of values
- 11:58 AM Bug #4455 (Test): Extent field on unsubscripted next-prompt not converted properly
- 11:57 AM Bug #4423 (Test): Incorrect buffer scoping when same buffer name used as a parameter to internal ...
- 10:42 AM Bug #4427 (Test): Unable to convert keyword input when used to index into an extent
- 10:39 AM Bug #4427: Unable to convert keyword input when used to index into an extent
- Committed @rules/annotations/input_builtin_prep.rules@ to *4207a-11367*.
- 10:19 AM Bug #4427: Unable to convert keyword input when used to index into an extent
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Roger, I think I found the root cause. Try replacing the @walk-rules@ with @ascent-rule...
12/28/2019
- 03:05 PM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- I still have two issues with @CLIENT-PRINCIPAL@ EXPORT/IMPORT support.
1. The quirk which is described in #4108 also... - 03:54 AM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Greg Shah wrote:
> 3809e is frozen at this time. Please create a new 3810e branch.
Thank you, Greg.
Created tas... - 08:58 PM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- 3809e is frozen at this time. Please create a new 3810e branch.
12/27/2019
- 02:17 PM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- It seems that multiple changes are required. Which branch should I use to commit? At this moment I'm working with 380...
- 02:33 AM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- Contrary to what is was said in #3810-174, the value of the @PRIMARY-PASSPHRASE@ attribute is *not* always hidden (re...
12/26/2019
- 05:27 PM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- With with 3809e revision 11456 @uast/security/export-cp.p@ reveals multiple incompatibilities in @CLIENT-PRINCIPAL@ ...
12/25/2019
- 02:47 PM Feature #3810: SECURITY-POLICY and other security features
- I'm trying to converted run @uast/security/export-cp.p@ with 3809e revision 11456 and two attached databases. The ser...
12/24/2019
- 02:22 PM Bug #4427: Unable to convert keyword input when used to index into an extent
- Roger, I think I found the root cause. Try replacing the @walk-rules@ with @ascent-rules@ in @input_builtin_prep.rul...
- 12:19 PM Bug #4427: Unable to convert keyword input when used to index into an extent
- I see that getScreenValue() is the method used in your testcase. The AST and Java look so much cleaner than in my tes...
- 11:44 AM Bug #4427: Unable to convert keyword input when used to index into an extent
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Roger Borrello wrote:
> > Thanks for looking. I had a much more complicated testcase or... - 11:17 AM Bug #4427: Unable to convert keyword input when used to index into an extent
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> Thanks for looking. I had a much more complicated testcase originally, which has been greatl... - 11:16 AM Bug #4427: Unable to convert keyword input when used to index into an extent
- There's something else going on. This case parses/converts properly:...
- 11:11 AM Bug #4427: Unable to convert keyword input when used to index into an extent
- Thanks for looking. I had a much more complicated testcase originally, which has been greatly reduced:...
- 10:59 AM Bug #4427: Unable to convert keyword input when used to index into an extent
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Roger Borrello wrote:
> > I went to a basic @input mybuff[x]@ where x was just an integ... - 10:55 AM Bug #4427: Unable to convert keyword input when used to index into an extent
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> I went to a basic @input mybuff[x]@ where x was just an integer. It generated:
I don't thin... - 10:22 AM Bug #4427: Unable to convert keyword input when used to index into an extent
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> What is @dynamicindex@ annotation used for? I'm trying to determine why the LBRACKET subtree...
12/23/2019
- 11:53 AM Bug #4427: Unable to convert keyword input when used to index into an extent
- What is @dynamicindex@ annotation used for? I'm trying to determine why the LBRACKET subtree is duplicated in @input_...
12/20/2019
- 04:54 PM Bug #4427: Unable to convert keyword input when used to index into an extent
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> I looked at a much simpler case of using @input mynum@ then @input mybuff[mynum]@ instead of... - 04:02 PM Bug #4427: Unable to convert keyword input when used to index into an extent
- I looked at a much simpler case of using @input mynum@ then @input mybuff[mynum]@ instead of the more complicated, ne...
- 02:52 PM Bug #4160: Arrays assigment issue
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Greg Shah wrote:
> > > a bug in ArrayAssigner - when is defined, a dynamic extent var g... - 01:06 PM Bug #4160: Arrays assigment issue
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> Does this mean the testcase is invalid? Or is there a bug? I was using 4207a, not trunk.
I ... - 01:04 PM Bug #4160: Arrays assigment issue
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> The above is from trunk: @if false then accum "third" (count).@ is marked as unreachable... - 12:57 PM Bug #4160: Arrays assigment issue
- Greg Shah wrote:
> > a bug in ArrayAssigner - when is defined, a dynamic extent var gets registered with the previou... - 12:07 PM Bug #4160: Arrays assigment issue
- The above is from trunk: @if false then accum "third" (count).@ is marked as unreachable, which is not correct. Any a...
- 11:56 AM Bug #4160: Arrays assigment issue
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Roger Borrello wrote:
> > Roger Borrello wrote:
> > > I think there is a regression. S... - 10:24 AM Bug #4160: Arrays assigment issue
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> Roger Borrello wrote:
> > I think there is a regression. See testcase below. In fact, I jus... - 09:58 AM Bug #4160: Arrays assigment issue
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> I think there is a regression. See testcase below. In fact, I just ran *4207a* against @uast... - 09:56 AM Bug #4160: Arrays assigment issue
- I think there is a regression. See testcase below. In fact, I just ran *4207a* against @uast/accum_scope*.p" and ther...
- 09:36 AM Bug #4160: Arrays assigment issue
- > use a special wrapper (so that we can make even the dynamic extent vars 'mutable', maybe limited to shared cases)
... - 09:33 AM Bug #4160: Arrays assigment issue
- > a bug in ArrayAssigner - when is defined, a dynamic extent var gets registered with the previous scope, and not the...
- 01:09 PM Bug #4484: Accumulator confusion using same field for count and total
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Argh, there was another typo. fixed in 11366
Great... this update worked! We need to ... - 12:45 PM Bug #4484: Accumulator confusion using same field for count and total
- Argh, there was another typo. fixed in 11366
- 12:12 PM Bug #4484: Accumulator confusion using same field for count and total
- Just reporting that there is another scenario which creates a hidden FieldRef. I checked in @uast/accum/accum_count_h...
- 10:02 AM Bug #4484: Accumulator confusion using same field for count and total
- Roger Borrello wrote:
> Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> > Roger, see 4207a rev 11362, it should fix the issue.
>
> I... - 10:00 AM Bug #4484: Accumulator confusion using same field for count and total
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Roger, see 4207a rev 11362, it should fix the issue.
I'll take a look - 09:31 AM Bug #4484: Accumulator confusion using same field for count and total
- Roger, see 4207a rev 11362, it should fix the issue.
- 12:34 PM Bug #4480: Extent does not become fixed when there is an initial list of values
- Greg Shah wrote:
> > The updated ended up being in Variable.java, so updated to progress.g are unnecessary. However,... - 11:42 AM Bug #4480: Extent does not become fixed when there is an initial list of values
- > The updated ended up being in Variable.java, so updated to progress.g are unnecessary. However, the changes could b...
Also available in: Atom