[m-rev.] for review: display the reason why a question was asked in the dd

[Julien Fischer]

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005, Ian MacLarty wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 08:58:53AM +1100, Julien Fischer wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 13 Mar 2005, Ian MacLarty wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, Mar 13, 2005 at 04:20:31PM +1100, Julien Fischer wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, 12 Mar 2005, Ian MacLarty wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > For review by anyone.
> > > > >
> > > > > Estimated hours taken: 14
> > > > > Branches: main
> > > > >
> > > > > Include the reason why a question was asked in the information provided by the
> > > > > `info' command.  This includes the place where a marked subterm was bound if
> > > > > the user marked a subterm in the previous question.
> > > > >
> > > > > browser/declarative_analyser.m
> > > > > 	Add a new type to record the reason why a question was asked.  Keep
> > > > > 	this information with the last question asked in the analyser state, in
> > > > > 	case the user issues an `info' command.  Display the reason when the
> > > > > 	user issues an `info' command.
> > > > >
> > > > > 	Change the behaviour of subterm dependency tracking slightly: if the
> > > > > 	binding node was previously skipped then ask about it anyway.
> > > > >
> > > > Briefly mention why here.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Okay:
> > > 	The user can then see in which node the sub-term was bound, which may
> > > 	help them in answering the previously skipped question.
> > >
> > Was there any ever conclusive decision on whether it should be sub-term or
> > subterm?
> >
>
> It's supposed to be "subterm".  At least that's what we used in the paper
> Zoltan, Mark and I just submitted to AADEBUG.
>
That's probably for the best because that's what I changed all the
documentation to as well ;-)


> >
> > The diff looks fine though.
> >
>
> Not quite.  I discovered a bug after posting for review.  I was attempting to always
> show the path of the subterm in the binding node, however the subterm will only appear
> in the binding node if it is an output of the binding node (if it's an input, then
> it's bound elsewhere).
>
> I also renamed the variable PrimitiveOpId to BindingSuspectId, since that describes
> the variable's value better.
>

That looks alright.

Julien.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury-reviews mailing list
post:  mercury-reviews at cs.mu.oz.au
administrative address: owner-mercury-reviews at cs.mu.oz.au
unsubscribe: Address: mercury-reviews-request at cs.mu.oz.au Message: unsubscribe
subscribe:   Address: mercury-reviews-request at cs.mu.oz.au Message: subscribe
--------------------------------------------------------------------------