Prev: TDBC: documentation for the postgres driver?
Next: How to simulate a mouse click?
From: Alexandre Ferrieux on 8 Jun 2010 15:06
On Jun 8, 8:40 pm, Georgios Petasis <peta...(a)iit.demokritos.gr> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am observing something strange (at least to me):
>
> <b is a command defined by a C extension>
> proc a {} {
>    return [b]
>
> }
>
> rename b some_namespace::b
> interp alias {} ::b {} some_proc_that_calls_b
>
> Then, calling a, it does not call "some_proc_that_calls_b", but b
> directly. Is this expected?
>
> To be more specific, I get "mixed" results: in some places, calling b
> correctly calls "some_proc_that_calls_b". In some other cases, it calls
> b directly. If I redefine proc a after the allias, it always calls
> some_proc_that_calls_b. Is this something expected to happen?

Hmmm, can you please post the exact code and factual output ?
I cannot seem to reproduce what you describe with 8.6 HEAD, and to be
honest I'm not sure what you mean.

-Alex

From: miguel sofer on 8 Jun 2010 17:08
Alexandre Ferrieux wrote:
> On Jun 8, 8:40 pm, Georgios Petasis <peta...(a)iit.demokritos.gr> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I am observing something strange (at least to me):
>>
>> <b is a command defined by a C extension>
>> proc a {} {
>> return [b]
>>
>> }
>>
>> rename b some_namespace::b
>> interp alias {} ::b {} some_proc_that_calls_b
>>
>> Then, calling a, it does not call "some_proc_that_calls_b", but b
>> directly. Is this expected?
>>
>> To be more specific, I get "mixed" results: in some places, calling b
>> correctly calls "some_proc_that_calls_b". In some other cases, it calls
>> b directly. If I redefine proc a after the allias, it always calls
>> some_proc_that_calls_b. Is this something expected to happen?
>
> Hmmm, can you please post the exact code and factual output ?
> I cannot seem to reproduce what you describe with 8.6 HEAD, and to be
> honest I'm not sure what you mean.
>
> -Alex
>

Yes please - a way to repro? That is definitely a bug.
From: George Petasis on 9 Jun 2010 01:33
στις 8/6/2010 10:06 μμ, O/H Alexandre Ferrieux έγραψε:
> On Jun 8, 8:40 pm, Georgios Petasis<peta...(a)iit.demokritos.gr> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I am observing something strange (at least to me):
>>
>> <b is a command defined by a C extension>
>> proc a {} {
>> return [b]
>>
>> }
>>
>> rename b some_namespace::b
>> interp alias {} ::b {} some_proc_that_calls_b
>>
>> Then, calling a, it does not call "some_proc_that_calls_b", but b
>> directly. Is this expected?
>>
>> To be more specific, I get "mixed" results: in some places, calling b
>> correctly calls "some_proc_that_calls_b". In some other cases, it calls
>> b directly. If I redefine proc a after the allias, it always calls
>> some_proc_that_calls_b. Is this something expected to happen?
>
> Hmmm, can you please post the exact code and factual output ?
> I cannot seem to reproduce what you describe with 8.6 HEAD, and to be
> honest I'm not sure what you mean.
>
> -Alex
>

Dear Alex (and Miguel),

I am sorry, it was a false alarm. I have deleted the original message,
but you were too quick. It was an error in my code.
(I have switched from sqlite to postgres through tdbc, which doesn't
have "insert or update" which led to some tk bindings to not fire well).

Best regards,

George
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: TDBC: documentation for the postgres driver?
Next: How to simulate a mouse click?