5300+ entries in 0.015s
mod6: Thanks for your patience with me this past year, #trilema. It's been a long one.
mod6: BingoBoingo: no worries. i agree though. f twitter.
mod6: david_francois: hey, good deal, thx!
mod6: They did suspend you for a brief time didn't they?
mod6: no worries. thanks Mr. P.
mod6: alright, i have a drive to get to the bottom of things. will back off.
mod6: i think i have dane bramage.
mod6: lol, well i don't wanna have to fuck with it. and it's not exactly fun. but i really can't stop either.
mod6: I believe what might be happening here is that my traversal follows all edges, where as yours does something different perhaps
mod6: phf: ahh, ok now im looking at your graph, my graph, and my press path. your right path does ~NOT~ contain 'vdiff_fixes_newline_gcc.vpatch'. My press path does.
mod6: lemme do that quick.
mod6: ok, so in that case: vtools_genesis.vpatch -> vtools_vdiff_sha.vpatch -> vdiff_sha_fixes_newline_gcc
mod6: ok the damn file names are so similar im getting confused.
☟︎ mod6: vtools_genesis.vpatch -> vtools_vdiff_sha.vpatch -> vdiff_fixes_newline_gcc.vpatch
mod6: if I press either path, i blow up on the manifest.
mod6: this is a megapuzzler.
mod6: i've put in a little fix for my 'check_ante' subroutine, but by what you're saying, this isn't correct then either (for press-path):
mod6: anyway, my apologies for the interruption. please continue.
mod6: phf: what am I missing here?
mod6: i believe that I am patching in the correct order. not only validated by the link to btcbase.org/patches above, but also the same press path is given from my v.
mod6: no! not even using vtronics at all. just a good ole fashion by hand patch application.
mod6: heheh, sorry for the double post. This tho ^
mod6: Then I went ahead and tried to manually patch these files together, first 'vtools_genesis.vpatch', then 'vtools_vdiff_sha.vpatch', then 'vdiff_sha_fixes_newline_gcc', and this is what I'm seeing:
mod6: Then I went ahead and tried to manually patch these files together, first 'vtools_genesis.vpatch', then 'vtools_vdiff_sha.vpatch', then 'vdiff_sha_fixes_newline_gcc', and this is what I'm seeing:
mod6: Well, I've implemented a better check there in the 'ante_check' subroutine. And I was gonna mess with it a bit more, but when I went to press the shorter of the two paths (visible at
http://btcbase.org/patches?patchset=vtools ), I ran into a press problem.
mod6: mircea_popescu: hahah.
mod6: I shouldn't call it a 'set', it's a simple array. but, anyway, yeah.
mod6: And in the case here, we have 1 more for each vpatch, where the extra one matches one already in the set. If I were to check each one to the other, then I think it'd be better, and avoid this problem. So I'm kinda working on a solution now.
mod6: I've been digging in here for about 15 minutes, and I've found the spot where we eject out those two vpatches. And the reason is that I do a kinda shitty check. Where I just compare that the number of node edges is equal to the number of expected.
mod6: I suspect, that there are others in the Republic now that could help me overcome that a bit; whether, phf, asciilifeform, or diana_coman.
mod6: mircea_popescu: yeah, would like to do that one. main reason i stuffed it in a drawer for the time being was that I was getting some really crumby performance with the manual string handling I was doing.
mod6: mircea_popescu: solid plan. i can add something like that perhaps when alternate paths are detected.
mod6: asciilifeform: ahhhh interesting, thanks for reporting.
mod6: mircea_popescu: i can try the leftmost trunck on phf's viewer, but not right this minute. maybe in a few hours. i'm pinned down in the mud. gotta kill the guy in the pillbox first.
mod6: yeah, this is true too.
mod6: in this case, it throws out: vdiff_sha_static.vpatch and vtools_fixes_static_tohex.vpatch
mod6: mircea_popescu: well, for instance, it would be nice if I'd have put a statement in the release version that yells when it throws a vpatch out for rule breakage.
mod6: So indeed, better failure messages are needed. And if we're going to allow this type of strange project structures, that'll have to get built into the rules.
mod6: alf already instructed me a number of months ago to be more verbose about failures. I didn't get that done as much on the last release as I was trying to limit the scope to the last change for the press-paths.
mod6: asciilifeform: out of curiosity, what version of my V are you using?
☟︎ mod6: If you understand my meaning. I.e. I would need to add an exception to the rule for that.
mod6: So made routines that do just that. There almost certainly is not a built in case where two antecedents have the same output hashes and can use a single in that csae.
mod6: Before we said "all antecedents must be present for a descendant to be in the flow".
mod6: I suspect that is the problem with the rules.
mod6: i need to do a deep debugging session to figure out the root cause.
mod6: there is a reason that those two vpatches are being thrown out.
mod6: yeah, im not sure wtf.
mod6: I could have missed one, indeed.
mod6: It sucks up way to much of my time.
mod6: Someone needs to write and maintain a proper V for the republic.
mod6: I don't have time to debug this shit now. but at some point I'll have to actually look at this project and try to figure out what the graph is ~supposed~ to look like and why my V chokes on it.
mod6: i need to call it a night.
mod6: *these were removed in the "ante_check" subroutine
mod6: this was removed in the "ante_check"
mod6: I added a debugging line:
mod6: these vpatches are thrown out as they fail a previous check.
mod6: it isn't in the flow. that's the problem.
mod6: im done with this thing.
mod6: someone else now needs to step up and write a V.
mod6: i don't think im the right person for this.
mod6: this is getting SUPER old.
mod6: can't even get anything else done, all i do is V. audit peoples shit.
mod6: so tired of fucking with v.
mod6: this is why i don't want to write this thing any more.
mod6: or it's a side effect of some coding
mod6: this violates rules that we've previously put in place then.
mod6: oh, im specifically talking about the patch set from your latest post.
mod6: then both vdiff_sha_static.vpatch and vtools_fixes_static_tohex.vpatch try to use the same input.
mod6: here's where two vpatches have the same outputs for 'xalloc.h'
mod6: but this time, i dunno wtf is going on here. it's a mess.