Re: killing nyquist with extract
Posted: Sun Nov 24, 2013 2:08 am
I was looking for an older thread about snd-xform which implements extract and found this. I suspect bugginess in snd-xform, though Steve disagreed with me. Could this be related?
Assertions in programs are supposed to mean "it should be provable that this never happens." They are not supposed to punish the user for bad inputs. Invocations of Lisp's (error) from the C code is what is supposed to happen. From what I have read of Nyquist sources so far, they seem conscientious about that difference. Maybe there really is a snd-xform bug leaving things in a bad state? Or can this assertion in seq be got without extract?
Assertions in programs are supposed to mean "it should be provable that this never happens." They are not supposed to punish the user for bad inputs. Invocations of Lisp's (error) from the C code is what is supposed to happen. From what I have read of Nyquist sources so far, they seem conscientious about that difference. Maybe there really is a snd-xform bug leaving things in a bad state? Or can this assertion in seq be got without extract?