Difference between revisions of "Common MUMPS Errors and What they Mean"
DavidWhitten (talk | contribs) |
|||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | |||
== MUMPS Language Errors == | == MUMPS Language Errors == | ||
First, the [[MUMPS Error List]] gives the list of MUMPS Error code defined in the MUMPS Standard. | First, the [[MUMPS Error List]] gives the list of MUMPS Error code defined in the MUMPS Standard. | ||
| − | == Vendor Specific | + | == Vendor Specific == |
| − | The [[MUMPS Error List]] isn't all of the errors you may encounter, however, as there are other errors that specific to a particular Implementation of MUMPS. This section attempts to classify them, and explain how they occur and how to change your program to avoid them. | + | The [[MUMPS Error List]] isn't all of the errors you may encounter, however, as there are other errors that are specific to a particular Implementation of MUMPS. This section attempts to classify them, and explain how they occur and how to change your program to avoid them. |
| − | === | + | === MUMPS Language Processor Stack Overflow === |
It can happen with repeatedly performing a DO command to any location. | It can happen with repeatedly performing a DO command to any location. | ||
| + | This error is common when writing [[Recursive Routines]] that don't | ||
| + | have the proper end conditions. | ||
| + | |||
Anything that is putting new entries on the stack frame without | Anything that is putting new entries on the stack frame without | ||
eventually removing them. The stack on DSM or Cache can probably handle | eventually removing them. The stack on DSM or Cache can probably handle | ||
300+ entries, so it never overflows with legitimate logic. --- [[Greg Kreis]] | 300+ entries, so it never overflows with legitimate logic. --- [[Greg Kreis]] | ||
| − | |||
Actually, I think you got into an infinite loop making repeated routine | Actually, I think you got into an infinite loop making repeated routine | ||
calls (each of which requires the allocation of a new stack frame, | calls (each of which requires the allocation of a new stack frame, | ||
which contains such details as NEW variables and the return address). --- [[Greg Woodhouse]] | which contains such details as NEW variables and the return address). --- [[Greg Woodhouse]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | I am pulling deep from faulty memory. But you usually see this error in a | ||
| + | looping situation gone astray. You may have a FOR loop making DO calls | ||
| + | repeatedly without QUITing the DOs. If your programming logic is recursive | ||
| + | and calls itself repeatedly you can easily overflow the stack. How many DO | ||
| + | calls and FOR loops you can have nested varies depending upon the use of NEW | ||
| + | commands as NEWing variables takes up stack partition space. If you NEW | ||
| + | only a few variables, you can have more DO calls. NEW many variables and | ||
| + | you have fewer DO calls. -- [[Steven Mcphelan]] | ||
Latest revision as of 16:13, 7 May 2015
MUMPS Language Errors
First, the MUMPS Error List gives the list of MUMPS Error code defined in the MUMPS Standard.
Vendor Specific
The MUMPS Error List isn't all of the errors you may encounter, however, as there are other errors that are specific to a particular Implementation of MUMPS. This section attempts to classify them, and explain how they occur and how to change your program to avoid them.
MUMPS Language Processor Stack Overflow
It can happen with repeatedly performing a DO command to any location. This error is common when writing Recursive Routines that don't have the proper end conditions.
Anything that is putting new entries on the stack frame without eventually removing them. The stack on DSM or Cache can probably handle 300+ entries, so it never overflows with legitimate logic. --- Greg Kreis
Actually, I think you got into an infinite loop making repeated routine calls (each of which requires the allocation of a new stack frame, which contains such details as NEW variables and the return address). --- Greg Woodhouse
I am pulling deep from faulty memory. But you usually see this error in a looping situation gone astray. You may have a FOR loop making DO calls repeatedly without QUITing the DOs. If your programming logic is recursive and calls itself repeatedly you can easily overflow the stack. How many DO calls and FOR loops you can have nested varies depending upon the use of NEW commands as NEWing variables takes up stack partition space. If you NEW only a few variables, you can have more DO calls. NEW many variables and you have fewer DO calls. -- Steven Mcphelan
