[Gambas-user] Gambas 3.9.

2016-09-06 Thread Antonio Teixeira
Hello everyone.

I Instaled gambas 3.9.0 and gambas 3.9.1.
No errors compiling and instaling but then dont work. I just get
"Segmentation fault (core dumped)" .
What can I send here  (infos) to try to get some help?
Thank you very much.

​best regards


António Teixeira
--
___
Gambas-user mailing list
Gambas-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gambas-user


Re: [Gambas-user] Gambas 3.9.

2016-09-06 Thread Benoît Minisini
Le 06/09/2016 à 12:59, Antonio Teixeira a écrit :
> Hello everyone.
>
> I Instaled gambas 3.9.0 and gambas 3.9.1.
> No errors compiling and instaling but then dont work. I just get
> "Segmentation fault (core dumped)" .
> What can I send here  (infos) to try to get some help?
> Thank you very much.
>
> ​best regards
>
>
> António Teixeira

All is explained on the web site (Help menu -> Reporting a problem, 
chapter 3).

Send the full output of the entire configuration + compilation + install 
process from scratch first. Give information about your system 
(distribution, CPU...). Then we'll see.

Regards,

-- 
Benoît Minisini

--
___
Gambas-user mailing list
Gambas-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gambas-user


[Gambas-user] [Gambas Bug Tracker] Bug #896: gb.xml: Crash when ending tag not complete

2016-09-06 Thread bugtracker
http://gambaswiki.org/bugtracker/edit?object=BUG.896&from=L21haW4-

Comment #6 by PICCORO LENZ MCKAY:

hi benoit, i see the commit, i'll compile and test in few minutes, but before i 
think about it and i dont know, i'm not sure: the brackes will solve the 
problem!? well i'll test and report feedback in minutes



--
___
Gambas-user mailing list
Gambas-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gambas-user


[Gambas-user] [Gambas Bug Tracker] Bug #984: error compiling again 0.9 openssl, only 1.0 compiles

2016-09-06 Thread bugtracker
http://gambaswiki.org/bugtracker/edit?object=BUG.984&from=L21haW4-

Comment #37 by Tyrone LUCERO:

i recompile lasted svn r7895 and that was the results in Ubuntu 12.04 fresh 
install, the hmac crypt are good! seem its a openssl problem, due i also noted 
that openssl 0.9.8 are availabel in ubuntu 12.04 so iĺl compile and test agains 
that to confirm if are a openssl old bug!

compilation: sussesfully using openssl 1.0.0

test using the provide project:

All hashed or ciphered data is base64 encoded

Checking digest sha256...
Output is:  ungWv48Bz+pBQUDeXa4iI7ADYaOWF3qctBD/YfIAFa0=
Should read:ungWv48Bz+pBQUDeXa4iI7ADYaOWF3qctBD/YfIAFa0=
---
Checking cipher (salted) aes256...
Output is:  U2FsdGVkX18BI0VniavN7464hGnXjHmRYfG6I2X1nJA=
Should read:U2FsdGVkX18BI0VniavN7464hGnXjHmRYfG6I2X1nJA=
abcrypted:  abc
Should read:abc
---
Checking cipher blowfish...
Output is:  QNVH2mCCLE0=
Should read:QNVH2mCCLE0=
Decrypted:  abc
Should read:abc
---
Checking HMAC...
Output is:  T9CyFSdu8S8rPkyOysKBFJi2Vvw=
Should read:T9CyFSdu8S8rPkyOysKBFJi2Vvw=
---
Done.



--
___
Gambas-user mailing list
Gambas-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gambas-user


[Gambas-user] [Gambas Bug Tracker] Bug #896: gb.xml: Crash when ending tag not complete

2016-09-06 Thread bugtracker
http://gambaswiki.org/bugtracker/edit?object=BUG.896&from=L21haW4-

Comment #7 by PICCORO LENZ MCKAY:

well u have right! now works! i dont understand why now works with the brackes 
but maybe the compiler dont like the assumend if-next, thanks benoit!

now lets test the smtp/imap related module!



--
___
Gambas-user mailing list
Gambas-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gambas-user


Re: [Gambas-user] some questions around collections copy and collections inside collections

2016-09-06 Thread Tobias Boege
On Tue, 06 Sep 2016, PICCORO McKAY Lenz wrote:
> i have a function that returns a collections of collections, named
> getPedidogeneral
> 
> i mean, this function returns object coll1 that inside each key is a id of
> a object that also are a collection too
> 
> i try to copy the firts to other, i mean coll2 = coll1.copy() or coll2 =
> coll1
> 
> i noted that the refers inside coll1 are the same as coll2!
> 
> the problem are that if i modified some keys of the coll1 object, same key
> in the coll2 object also its modified!
> 
> and so the only way to modified each collection without affecting the other
> its obtain a copy with differents references but same contents, so i must
> recall the function for that!
> 
> to ilustrate i posted a image
> 

That is the expected behaviour. Copying coll1 should create a new Collection
with exactly the same contents, i.e. a /shallow/ copy of the Collection, as
opposed to a /deep/ copy in which all contents of coll1 would also have been
copied recursively.

There's something called Rice's Theorem which forbids the existence of a
general algorithm which can create a deep copy of any Gambas object [*].
Since a Collection may hold any object, it is impossible to create deep
copies of Collections, *in general*.

Of course, if you know that your Collection only contains Collections, which,
in turn, you are sure only contain primitive data types (which can easily be
deep-copied), then you can, of course, write a deep copy function:

  '' Assumes ~cCol~ is a Collection of Collections, each of which contains
  '' data of primitive types.
  Private Function CopyMyCollection(cCol As Collection)
Private cNew As New Collection
Dim cElt As Collection

For Each cElt In cCol
  cNew[cCol.Key] = cElt.Copy()
Next
Return cNew
  End

Regards,
Tobi

[*] More specifically it follows from Rice that you can't decide if a 64-bit
word is meant by the program to be a number or a pointer. /If/ a general
copy routine for objects existed, you could apply it to any given 64-bit
word and if the copy is different from the original, it must have been a
pointer (which the copy routine had to deep-copy), and otherwise it must
have been a number because its value had to be preserved by the copier.
But because that is undecidable, you get a contradcition.

-- 
"There's an old saying: Don't change anything... ever!" -- Mr. Monk

--
___
Gambas-user mailing list
Gambas-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gambas-user


Re: [Gambas-user] some questions around collections copy and collections inside collections

2016-09-06 Thread Tobias Boege
On Tue, 06 Sep 2016, Tobias Boege wrote:
> Of course, if you know that your Collection only contains Collections, which,
> in turn, you are sure only contain primitive data types (which can easily be
> deep-copied), then you can, of course, write a deep copy function:
> 
>   '' Assumes ~cCol~ is a Collection of Collections, each of which contains
>   '' data of primitive types.
>   Private Function CopyMyCollection(cCol As Collection)

  Private Function CopyMyCollection(cCol As Collection) *As Collection*

> Private cNew As New Collection

  *Dim* cNew As New Collection

> Dim cElt As Collection
> 
> For Each cElt In cCol
>   cNew[cCol.Key] = cElt.Copy()
> Next
> Return cNew
>   End
> 

The above are some obvious errors which I just noticed and might as well
correct. I still haven't compiled the code to see if it actually works.
It is just to give you the idea.

Regards,
Tobi

-- 
"There's an old saying: Don't change anything... ever!" -- Mr. Monk

--
___
Gambas-user mailing list
Gambas-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gambas-user


Re: [Gambas-user] some questions around collections copy and collections inside collections

2016-09-06 Thread Jussi Lahtinen
If "keys of the coll1 object" refers to variables in the objects, then the
problem is simply, because that the copy of collection contains same object
references as the original collection.
Then to correct that you need to create new objects for the new collection.


Jussi

On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 11:19 PM, Tobias Boege  wrote:

> On Tue, 06 Sep 2016, PICCORO McKAY Lenz wrote:
> > i have a function that returns a collections of collections, named
> > getPedidogeneral
> >
> > i mean, this function returns object coll1 that inside each key is a id
> of
> > a object that also are a collection too
> >
> > i try to copy the firts to other, i mean coll2 = coll1.copy() or coll2 =
> > coll1
> >
> > i noted that the refers inside coll1 are the same as coll2!
> >
> > the problem are that if i modified some keys of the coll1 object, same
> key
> > in the coll2 object also its modified!
> >
> > and so the only way to modified each collection without affecting the
> other
> > its obtain a copy with differents references but same contents, so i must
> > recall the function for that!
> >
> > to ilustrate i posted a image
> >
>
> That is the expected behaviour. Copying coll1 should create a new
> Collection
> with exactly the same contents, i.e. a /shallow/ copy of the Collection, as
> opposed to a /deep/ copy in which all contents of coll1 would also have
> been
> copied recursively.
>
> There's something called Rice's Theorem which forbids the existence of a
> general algorithm which can create a deep copy of any Gambas object [*].
> Since a Collection may hold any object, it is impossible to create deep
> copies of Collections, *in general*.
>
> Of course, if you know that your Collection only contains Collections,
> which,
> in turn, you are sure only contain primitive data types (which can easily
> be
> deep-copied), then you can, of course, write a deep copy function:
>
>   '' Assumes ~cCol~ is a Collection of Collections, each of which contains
>   '' data of primitive types.
>   Private Function CopyMyCollection(cCol As Collection)
> Private cNew As New Collection
> Dim cElt As Collection
>
> For Each cElt In cCol
>   cNew[cCol.Key] = cElt.Copy()
> Next
> Return cNew
>   End
>
> Regards,
> Tobi
>
> [*] More specifically it follows from Rice that you can't decide if a
> 64-bit
> word is meant by the program to be a number or a pointer. /If/ a
> general
> copy routine for objects existed, you could apply it to any given
> 64-bit
> word and if the copy is different from the original, it must have been
> a
> pointer (which the copy routine had to deep-copy), and otherwise it
> must
> have been a number because its value had to be preserved by the copier.
> But because that is undecidable, you get a contradcition.
>
> --
> "There's an old saying: Don't change anything... ever!" -- Mr. Monk
>
> 
> --
> ___
> Gambas-user mailing list
> Gambas-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gambas-user
>
--
___
Gambas-user mailing list
Gambas-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gambas-user