 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
mmm, povray.bugreports seems to be locked. o well.
2.2.1.2 Comments (block comments).
up to v3.6. (don't know about 3.7beta).
Probably already know, and trivial, but still ... not seeing any mention of
it in (online) doc's.
Povray's-Editor syntax highlighting is a little off when it comes to
following the syntax rules for nested block comments. (its highliting them
in default c-style)
Also (very trivial), think the example is not really showing the difference
to not nested block-comment style.
---(org)
/* This is a comment
// This too
/* This also */
*/
---
---(mine)
/* This is a comment
// This too
/* This also */
and this one is also a comment
*/
---
Come to think of it, this probebly make the SciTe-Pov-Lexer the only true
compliant Povray-syntax-highlighter in the world. :-)
(damn C-junkies ;-) )
anyway, a trivial mail from a trivial individual.
cheers
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
MvGulik wrote:
> mmm, povray.bugreports seems to be locked. o well.
>
> 2.2.1.2 Comments (block comments).
>
> up to v3.6. (don't know about 3.7beta).
This is the wrong group for this message. Please read
Newsgroups: povray.announce.frequently-asked-questions
Subject: bug reporting
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 20:32:49 -0700
From: Alan Kong <ako### [at] povrayWWW SPAMCOMorg>
Message-ID: <fpupiu02i1198jbb38i3o06hv6is1a3uar@4ax.com>
Xref: news.povray.org povray.announce.frequently-asked-questions:50
Thorsten, POV-Team
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Rigghht.
Sorry for trespassing in the programmers geek club o honourable master.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
MvGulik <.......@dds.nl> wrote:
> Rigghht.
> Sorry for trespassing in the programmers geek club o honourable master.
Do you think that's the attitude that will give you serious answers
to your questions?
You are an invited guest in this news servers. You behave as the owners
want you to behave. It's that simple. (And it's not like the usage policy
of this server would be unreasonable in any way.)
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"MvGulik" <.......@dds.nl> wrote in message news:442261cf@news.povray.org...
> mmm, povray.bugreports seems to be locked. o well.
>
> 2.2.1.2 Comments (block comments).
>
> up to v3.6. (don't know about 3.7beta).
>
> Probably already know, and trivial, but still ... not seeing any mention of
> it in (online) doc's.
>
> Povray's-Editor syntax highlighting is a little off when it comes to
> following the syntax rules for nested block comments. (its highliting them
> in default c-style)
>
> Also (very trivial), think the example is not really showing the difference
> to not nested block-comment style.
>
> ---(org)
> /* This is a comment
> // This too
> /* This also */
> */
> ---
> ---(mine)
> /* This is a comment
> // This too
> /* This also */
> and this one is also a comment
> */
> ---
>
> Come to think of it, this probebly make the SciTe-Pov-Lexer the only true
> compliant Povray-syntax-highlighter in the world. :-)
> (damn C-junkies ;-) )
>
> anyway, a trivial mail from a trivial individual.
> cheers
I can confirm this bug exists in 3.7.0.beta.11c as well.
A minimal test case is:
/*
/* correctly highlighted */
incorrectly highlighted
*/
Lance.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Lance Birch <-> wrote:
> I can confirm this bug exists in 3.7.0.beta.11c as well.
It's not so much a bug (ie. a programming error) than a limitation
of the editor. Limitations are not bugs.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message news:44250ffe@news.povray.org...
> Lance Birch <-> wrote:
> > I can confirm this bug exists in 3.7.0.beta.11c as well.
>
> It's not so much a bug (ie. a programming error) than a limitation
> of the editor. Limitations are not bugs.
I suppose, but the behaviour surely isn't intended: comments should be
highlighted as comments, only in certain situations they aren't correctly
highlighted. From the end users' perspective it's a "bug" - it's not doing
what's expected.
It'd be like saying that the trace-and-no_image bug was a limitation rather than
a bug (in both cases something that's expected to happen doesn't happen).
In any case, it's a minor issue.
Meanwhile I'm still trying to reliably replicate a "60-second-freeze" bug that
happens with 3.7.0.beta.11c and prior versions as well (has anyone else
experienced this?). It happened again today... it's a combination of tip of the
day being displayed and the splash screen, but I can't reproduce it reliably; it
only ever happens when tip of the day has been displayed and clicked past, and
then the splash image displayed and clicked past, at which point the interface
stops responding for 60 seconds (with no CPU usage), and then unfreezes and is
fine again.
I've experienced "uncategorized parse error" a few times too, though again I
haven't been able to reliably replicate the circumstances that create it (and I
think it might be to do with something that's not in the build on the website
anyway).
Lance.
thezone - thezone.firewave.com.au
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Lance Birch <-> wrote:
> I suppose, but the behaviour surely isn't intended: comments should be
> highlighted as comments, only in certain situations they aren't correctly
> highlighted. From the end users' perspective it's a "bug" - it's not doing
> what's expected.
> It'd be like saying that the trace-and-no_image bug was a limitation rather than
> a bug (in both cases something that's expected to happen doesn't happen).
It all comes down to the definition of "bug".
There are basically three ways a program may work in a way it shouldn't:
1: A behaviour has been clearly specified when designing the program and
the programmer had the intention to code it correctly, but made a mistake
which slipped during testing and thus the program doesn't work correctly
and against the specification. This is clearly a programming error, ie. a
bug.
2: Something more or less obvious is not specifically stated as a
requirement for the program, either because of a human overlook or
just because nobody thought about it, and thus it gets never implemented.
Usually it's something that, when the programmer is told about, he goes
"doh, I didn't about that one". In a way one could classify this as a
programming mistake, ie. a bug. It just happened at a bit higher level.
Problems with some POV-Ray features such as related to trace and no_image
fall into this category.
3: Something was specified differently than what the future use of
the feature requires. The programmer codes exactly and flawlessly as
specified, and the program works as specified. Only in a future unexpected
scenario it turns out that the specification was lacking.
This is the case with the winpov editor and nested comments: The original
coder never thought that it could be used for a language supporting C-style
comments which can be (legally) nested and thus never bothered to even add
support for that. You have to remember that the editor was a completely
separate and independent program from POV-Ray, and that they were joined
at some point. The original coder of the editor couldn't have predicted
that his editor will be used for POV-Ray SDL in the future.
It's thus not a bug, it's just a limitation, a flawed design. That, of
course, doesn't mean that it wouldn't be a great thing if support for
nested comments would be added to the editor. However, it would be wrong
to call it "a bug".
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Lance Birch wrote:
>>>I can confirm this bug exists in 3.7.0.beta.11c as well.
>>
>> It's not so much a bug (ie. a programming error) than a limitation
>>of the editor. Limitations are not bugs.
>
> I suppose, but the behaviour surely isn't intended
It most certainly is intended. IIRC I vaguely remember it actually being
documented somewhere (older release notes maybe?) or having been discussed
before. It is just that nested comments cannot be colored correctly for
computational complexity reasons. It is not a bug, and anyway the way it was
"reported" and where it was "reported" were simply unacceptable.
Thorsten
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thorsten Froehlich <tho### [at] trfde> wrote:
> It is just that nested comments cannot be colored correctly for
> computational complexity reasons.
If nested comments can be *parsed* correctly (as povray does), they
certainly can be colored correctly.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
