search

BayesianLogic / blog

The BLOG programming language
http://bayesianlogic.github.io/
BSD 4-Clause "Original" or "Old" License
98 stars 31 forks source link

remove default memory setting #285

Open jxwuyi opened 10 years ago

jxwuyi commented 10 years ago

@datang1992 @lileicc

currently in the new version, there is no memory setting by default.

lileicc commented 10 years ago

@jxwuyi, @datang1992 is it possible to set JVM options on commandline?

lileicc commented 10 years ago

@datang1992 Please double check if you are able to run it with additional JVM options from commandline.

jxwuyi commented 10 years ago

@datang1992 You could test it using the option -J<-opts> <-opts> is the original option you would like to add in the Java command line

datang1992 commented 10 years ago

@jxwuyi @lileicc Do you mean that I should run something like "iblog -J-Xmx1024M"?

I could run this command, but it seems that it could be executed even if the <-opts> is an invalid command. For example, "iblog -J-asdasdwdqw".

jxwuyi commented 10 years ago

@datang1992 Well, -J is a scala option which means to take the following option to be the java option. I am not sure if scala does some checking for this. You might have a try.

datang1992 commented 10 years ago

@lileicc @jxwuyi Now iblog.bat works when the memory settings is the first parameter. Do you thinks we need to make a modification to make sure it works for the other parameters?

datang1992 commented 10 years ago

@lileicc @jxwuyi Finished modifying the document.

jxwuyi commented 10 years ago

@datang1992 Look at you commits on Github webpage. it seems that there is some problem with your commits. (there is a red crossing for each of your commits). Could you please check it out to see what the problem is?

datang1992 commented 10 years ago

I just find that your original code doesn't work since that the memory won't be set exactly in Windows if you just type iblog -J-Xmx*\ in your original version. But it works on Linux/Mac. I don't know the reason. But I tried on my laptop that writing in this way will work.

datang1992 commented 10 years ago

If you think there is something wrong with the pull request, I could create a new pull request from master and add the two modifications in the request. @jxwuyi

chrisgioia64 commented 10 years ago

I haven't set up continuous integration correctly as of today, so ignore the red crossings for now.

On Jul 22, 2014, at 7:29 PM, jxwuyi notifications@github.com wrote:

@datang1992 Look at you commits on Github webpage. it seems that there is some problem with your commits. (there is a red crossing for each of your commits). Could you please check it out to see what the problem is?

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

jxwuyi commented 10 years ago

@chrisgioia64 What caused this crossing? @datang1992 I am very curious why the old version does not work. The new version seems to do the same thing as before. Could you please do some research to see what's the difference?

datang1992 commented 10 years ago

I could try do find out the reason. Could you have a try for both of the versions and try to see that if it is the case that the original one fails while the new one works? @jxwuyi

chrisgioia64 commented 10 years ago

@jxwuyi When I properly set up the continuous integration, the red crossings at this page are supposed to indicate that there is a failure with running the tests. https://github.com/BayesianLogic/blog/pull/285

For more information, refer to this issue: https://github.com/BayesianLogic/blog/issues/288

You can see the stack trace for one of the commits here: https://travis-ci.org/BayesianLogic/blog/builds/30608315

Basically, it clones the repo, does some preprocessing, and runs a few test scripts.

Do either of you understand how sbt/sbt test works? I don't know what tests sbt/sbt test does, and how the sbt-launch.jar is created?

On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 9:48 PM, jxwuyi notifications@github.com wrote:

@chrisgioia64 https://github.com/chrisgioia64 What caused this crossing? @datang1992 https://github.com/datang1992 I am very curious why the old version does not work. The new version seems to do the same thing as before. Could you please do some research to see what's the difference?

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/BayesianLogic/blog/pull/285#issuecomment-49832710.

jxwuyi commented 10 years ago

@datang1992 Sure I will check it out tmmr. @lileicc Could you please have a look at @chrisgioia64 's problem?

lileicc commented 10 years ago

Donot worry about the test for now. Once Chris finished, it will disappear.

Lei

On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 11:09 PM, jxwuyi notifications@github.com wrote:

@datang1992 https://github.com/datang1992 Sure I will check it out tmmr. @lileicc https://github.com/lileicc Could you please have a look at @chrisgioia64 https://github.com/chrisgioia64 's problem?

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/BayesianLogic/blog/pull/285#issuecomment-49836491.