Cooked giga up #123
Cooked giga up #123
Conversation
|
You implemented |
|
My bad. Gonna rework this no cap |
|
Take your time to cook, no rush. And thanks for being willing to grind like a true sigma. Reach out on Discord if you need some guidance on this issue. |
dominik-air
force-pushed
the
feat/implement-giga-and-thicc
branch
from
a9037a8 to
f49245a
Compare
Yeah, I didn't understand how Value works. Now it's doing what I was expecting |
|
@dominik-air do you need some help with this? |
|
@dominik-air You can reduce the scope of the PR to make it just cover one of the modifiers. i think it will be simpler |
Indeed, it is better to keep PRs as granular as possible. |
|
@SIGMazer Agreed. This will be just a @araujo88 Help is always appreciated. I kinda tried to refactor some parts to reduce code duplication and this took me a while to implement without new bugs coming up. I still need to work on the "promotion" and node operations for those new types. |
Dockerfile
Outdated
| @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@ | |||
| FROM ubuntu:latest | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I compile and run brainrot inside a Docker container because I wasn't able to make it work on my Mac. Maybe this could be a future addition to the codebase to ease the setup process. Wdyt @araujo88 @SIGMazer
Of course a separate MR would be better for this contribution. I'll remove this in the final MR
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yup also i was thinking of add docker container to test the interpreter in other OS
There was a problem hiding this comment.
btw what the problem in mac os? maybe we can solve it
There was a problem hiding this comment.
tbh I don't even remember what was the issue, since I first came across brainrot some weeks ago
I just went with a Docker container because it was less fuss
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fair! If you try it and it has an issue please open an issue with the error
| #include <float.h> | ||
| #include <stdint.h> |
| @@ -1081,6 +1118,52 @@ void *handle_unary_expression(ASTNode *node, void *operand_value, int operand_ty | |||
| } | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| Value retrieve_array_access_value(ASTNode *node, Value default_return_value) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wanted to reduce code duplication, so I extracted the array access code into this function
There was a problem hiding this comment.
about think i was planing to refactor it in some sort of look up table so it will be like this
get_value[var->type](array_data, idx);i think this will make it easy for us when implementing pointers and multi-N arrays
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yup, good idea, but for now I just wanted to clean up a little bit
Description
Related Issue
Resolves #125
Type of Change
Checklist