Re: new FAQs

2007-05-24 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 19:05 on 05/23/2007 PDT, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It sounds like you are saying that languages are free to implement their own semantics using their own code, and that they can choose not to interoperate with predefined Parrot types or types from other languages when that

Re: new FAQs

2007-05-24 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 20:07 on 05/23/2007 PDT, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 10:37:06PM -0400, Josh Wilmes wrote: At 19:05 on 05/23/2007 PDT, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - better compiler tools than lex and yacc. Is it necessary (or even fair) to tie compiler

Re: Fwd: Minimum modules for Production?

2006-06-02 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 12:00 on 06/01/2006 BST, David Cantrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Basic I/O is talking to filehandles and nyetwork sockets. Anything above the UDP / TCP level should not, IMO, be included. I'd respectfully disagree. Just like text isn't just ascii any more, content isn't just on local

Re: Fwd: Minimum modules for Production?

2006-06-01 Thread Josh Wilmes
I think that the distribution approach is a good way to go. I also think that there could be value in a set of core modules for some basic functions. The only reason to do this, however, would be to design those modules to work especially well together. These modules could follow tighter

Re: [perl #760] Parrot_warn doesn't work with a NULL interpreter

2005-09-22 Thread Josh Wilmes
I haven't touched parrot in ages at this point. Please go ahead and close the bug. --Josh

Re: [perl #726] -fno-strict-aliasing (fwd)

2005-09-22 Thread Josh Wilmes
No, please close it. --Josh

Re: No Autoconf, dammit!

2004-09-08 Thread Josh Wilmes
While I am generally in favor of this idea (and I did get the first miniparrots to work, pretty much as proof of concept), I do think it's likely to be rather challenging (and interesting): Remember, _pure_ C89 provides only these headers: assert.h complex.h

Re: No Autoconf, dammit!

2004-09-08 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 9:23 on 09/08/2004 EDT, Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - executing programs in any kind of sophisticated way (fork/exec, pipes) We do get system and popen, though. Well, system at least. popen is not part of the c89 spec as far as I know. This URL is a fairly handy reference:

Re: No Autoconf, dammit!

2004-09-08 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 11:30 on 09/08/2004 CDT, Timm Murray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: *) Person building runs platform-specific script If that script is going to be platform-specific anyway, why not use Autoconf for the platforms that can handle it? You'd cover a rather large number of platforms that way,

Re: ICU Outdated - Ideas

2004-08-03 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 18:46 on 08/03/2004 EDT, Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If someone's got the time and I spec out the encoding and charset APIs, I'd be thrilled if ICU became optional again. Wouldn't hurt my feelings at all. We need it, because we need Unicode, but it doesn't have to be

Re: Configure.pl and the history of the world

2004-03-19 Thread Josh Wilmes
I began a little piece of this ages ago- attempting to translate the parts that identify the platform ($^O, essentially) from metaconfig to something we could put into Configure.pl. Even that relatively simple chore wasn't too easy. I should still have the work-in-progress code for that

Re: Configure.pl and the history of the world

2004-03-19 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 10:22 on 03/18/2004 EST, Andrew Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 5. You probably don't need to support Eunice anymore. I think i'm not the only one who would be deeply upset if I ceased to be congratulated for not running Eunice though. --Josh

Re: [PROPOSAL] Cstat opcode and interface

2004-03-10 Thread Josh Wilmes
I have no opinion either way on this opcode or the date/time ones, but I would like to remind folks about miniparrot- if we want it to work again, there needs to be a smooth way to exclude opcodes or PMCs which are not expecially portable on its platform (pure c89, no threads, etc). This means

Re: cvs commit: parrot/src interpreter.c

2004-03-08 Thread Josh Wilmes
Sorry, typo- I have no idea how that got by. --Josh At 5:00 on 03/09/2004 +0100, Jens Rieks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, On Tuesday 09 March 2004 04:24, Josh Wilmes wrote: cvsuser 04/03/08 19:24:12 Modified:src interpreter.c Log: Missing function/data casts

Re: [DOCS] Documentation tools

2004-03-04 Thread Josh Wilmes
At this point in the development cycle you can certainly make such arguments (although I would tend to fall on the side of consistency myself, at least for things that really Don't Matter in the grand scheme of things, such as POD modules). But once we start expecting people in the real world

Re: Threads... last call

2004-01-22 Thread Josh Wilmes
I'm also concerned by those timings that leo posted. 0.0001 vs 0.0005 ms on a set- that magnitude of locking overhead seems pretty crazy to me. It seemed like a few people have said that the JVM style of locking can reduce this, so it seems to me that it merits some serious consideration, even

Re: [DOCS] Updated documentation in Perl scripts

2004-01-20 Thread Josh Wilmes
Thank you! You make some of my cheesy code a bit more respectable :) --Josh At 23:35 on 01/20/2004 +0100, Michael Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've committed updates to the documentation in the Perl scripts in build_tools, classes and tools/dev.

Re: Threads. Design. Go for it

2004-01-01 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 16:15 on 12/30/2003 EST, Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Your constraints: 2) A perl 5 iThreads it's not a thread, it's a fork. Well, sorta... mode must be available For those of us who aren't particularly familiar with ithreads, what does this imply? What's different, and why

Re: Threads. Design. Go for it

2004-01-01 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 11:21 on 01/01/2004 PST, Jeff Clites [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As far as what level needs to implement them, I'd say that parrot has to do enough to make it possible for an HLL to expose ithreads-style threading. Due to the cross-language nature of parrot, practically speaking this

Re: Threads

2003-12-22 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 12:23 on 12/22/2003 EST, Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Second, we're assuming that the *non* threaded case is the common case. (This is definitely the assumption that I'm most expecting to regret in the future) I think it might be good to get started on regretting that as soon as

Re: Embedding interface to PMCs

2003-09-11 Thread Josh Wilmes
If the pdd is amended, let's not forget to update the check_source script- for that matter, if there are any other items that should be added (perhaps some specific checks for the embedding headers), let me know- I'll be happy to add them. --Josh At 18:57 on 09/11/2003 BST, Nicholas Clark

Re: Task for the interested: Coverage

2003-07-29 Thread Josh Wilmes
There is http://www.hitchhiker.org/parrot_coverage/, which is built by tools/dev/parrot_coverage.pl. Any enhancements made there should show up in the next run. I disabled it about a month ago when it started going into an endless loop on a test. I'll try turning it back on though. --Josh

Re: [CVS ci] make: print filenames only

2003-07-28 Thread Josh Wilmes
I don't like the current state of things- it seems to be printing out the full compilation commands occasionally, but mostly not. I think that at this stage of development it's best to print out the full commands being executed. --Josh At 15:34 on 07/28/2003 +0200, Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL

tcc failures

2003-07-28 Thread Josh Wilmes
abs N2, N2 gt N2, 0.01, .$FPEQNOK -- Josh Wilmes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | http://www.hitchhiker.org

Re: Small perl task for the interested

2003-07-19 Thread Josh Wilmes
: Josh Wilmes wrote: At 12:48 on 07/14/2003 +0200, Lars Balker Rasmussen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote : I've taken this very simple approach to the problem. A perl-wrapper for the CC lines in makefiles/root.in .c$(O) : $(PERL) tools/dev/cc_flags.pl $(CC) $(CFLAGS

Re: Small perl task for the interested

2003-07-18 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 12:48 on 07/14/2003 +0200, Lars Balker Rasmussen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've taken this very simple approach to the problem. A perl-wrapper for the CC lines in makefiles/root.in .c$(O) : $(PERL) tools/dev/cc_flags.pl $(CC) $(CFLAGS) ${cc_o_out}$@ -c $ I would go a bit

Re: Copyrights

2003-07-18 Thread Josh Wilmes
I can make such a change if you tell me exactly how it should be done. (I am not a lawyer, so i don't want to do this inappropriately). I'd think a safe first step would be to change any When this is determined to Yet Another Society. But beyond that it gets fuzzy to me. --Josh At 12:16

Re: #error generic platform without memalign

2003-06-14 Thread Josh Wilmes
Don't forget the so-called miniparrot, which must be built with ANSI C only- no POSIX functions that aren't guaranteed in C89. --Josh At 22:48 on 06/11/2003 +0200, Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nicholas Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've got a p6i backlog, so I don't know if

Re: build imcc as parrot (was: [perl #22352] PackFile imcc bug)

2003-06-02 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 11:40 on 06/01/2003 +0200, Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yep. Imcc should definitely move out off languages into its own subdir under the top level (Not in the top level itself). ... Who should do this? I'd be willing to help if given direction. Moving directories

Re: [perl #22352] PackFile imcc bug

2003-06-01 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 14:26 on 05/31/2003 EDT, Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Honestly I'd prefer just a single executable, named parrot, that can handle assembly files, rather than the two executables we're building now. If we can do that, we can ditch assemble.pl. I'm all for that as well. It

Re: tinderbox all in flames

2003-03-11 Thread Josh Wilmes
I'm not sure who owns the TD scripts, but I'd be willing to try to get them working again if someone could point me at them (and how to get the appropriate accounts, etc) --Josh At 14:29 on 03/10/2003 PST, Ask Bjoern Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The tinderbox is all in flames.

Re: The parrot crashes...

2003-01-20 Thread Josh Wilmes
It appears to be the same thing for tcc and lcc on linux. The nearest I can tell, the value stuffed into struct_val in Parrot_NCI_set_string_keyed is somehow not a valid PObj- dereferencing its obj member seems to blow things up. It stomps all over the stack somehow, and I don't have much

cvs commit: parrot/tools/dev rebuild_miniparrot.pl (fwd)

2003-01-04 Thread Josh Wilmes
FYI --- Forwarded Message Date:05 Jan 2003 00:41:55 + From:Josh Wilmes [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: cvs commit: parrot/tools/dev rebuild_miniparrot.pl cvsuser 03/01/04 16:41:54 Modified:config/auto jit.pl sizes.pl config/gen

Re: [perl #19630] [PATCH] undef warning in Configure.pl

2003-01-03 Thread Josh Wilmes
Applied both, thanks. --Josh At 19:11 on 12/31/2002 GMT, Nicholas Clark (via RT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: # New Ticket Created by Nicholas Clark # Please include the string: [perl #19630] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # URL:

Re: no no-strict-aliasing (more bondage and stricture)

2003-01-03 Thread Josh Wilmes
Done. --Josh At 22:57 on 12/31/2002 GMT, Nicholas Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Currently Parrot is picking up Perl's C compiler flags. Perl is quite deliberately attempting to set -fno-strict-aliasing, to stop gcc using ANSI's aliasing rules to infer possible optimisations; optimisations

Re: [perl #19163] configure probe for va_list*

2002-12-16 Thread Josh Wilmes
It would be nice if we could reach a solution that will work for the miniparrot (no configure, ansi C89 only) case. --Josh At 19:17 on 12/16/2002 EST, Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 8:33 AM -0500 12/16/02, Andy Dougherty wrote: On Mon, 16 Dec 2002, Steve Fink wrote: I'm a

Re: Tinderbox summary

2002-12-08 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 19:55 on 12/08/2002 PST, Steve Fink [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You can see the results here: http://foxglove.dnsalias.org/parrot/ I'm getting a 404 on that. --Josh

Re: [perl #18566] [PATCH]

2002-12-03 Thread Josh Wilmes
How about s/fuck/fork/? --Josh (mmm.. brainspork) At 22:59 on 12/03/2002 EST, Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 8:23 PM -0500 12/3/02, Andy Dougherty wrote: On Thu, 21 Nov 2002, Leon Brocard wrote: ps You might be concerned about the name. Well, CPAN has a module which

[PATCH] Function = Data Pointer Casts in nci.c

2002-11-20 Thread Josh Wilmes
This should correct warnings on a few compilers and outright breakage on tcc. It uses the D2FPTR/F2DPTR macros to cast between data and function pointers where needed. --Josh Index: nci.c === RCS file: /cvs/public/parrot/nci.c,v

Re: Tinderbox

2002-11-19 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 21:33 on 11/19/2002 PST, Steve Fink [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ### galactic-lcc (Debian x86, lcc 4.1) ### Failed the mod_n test in number.t, and the pushn popn (deep) test in stacks.t. Not sure what the story is with pushn/popn, but the mod_n failure is normal for lcc- it appears to

Re: Selfbootstrapping compilers (Was: faq)

2002-11-13 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 20:47 on 11/13/2002 GMT, Nicholas Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 03:06:03PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote: The goal is for Parrot to require a C compiler and a platform shell or Make tool (either one) and that's it. We will ship with bytecode files that have the

Re: [perl #18219] on_exit not portable

2002-11-08 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 8:02 on 11/08/2002 +0100, Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Josh Wilmes wrote: For the meantime, I have added the Parrot_exit and Parrot_on_exit function s to CVS. Thanks for providing this. I did slightly modify your patch to really get rid of the leaks: - test_main calls

Re: [perl #18219] on_exit not portable

2002-11-07 Thread Josh Wilmes
For the meantime, I have added the Parrot_exit and Parrot_on_exit functions to CVS. This will fix the leak on all platforms, for now. If you want to fix internal_exception so this isn't necessary, that's fine- we can rip this out later. --Josh At 22:21 on 11/06/2002 +0100, Leopold Toetsch

Re: [perl #18219] on_exit not portable

2002-11-06 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 7:58 on 11/06/2002 +0100, Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Josh Wilmes wrote: I agree. However, the point is fairly moot.. If we're going to do a Parrot_on_exit, it's just as easy to provide our own Parrot_exit and not need atexit() either.. it's not like atexit

Re: [perl #18219] on_exit not portable

2002-11-06 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 13:41 on 11/06/2002 EST, Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, I got bit this week by the on_exit stuff. I'm still not sure why we need this. Could someone please explain, so I don't have to yank it out? Leo said: The on_exit/atexit is currently necessary to clean up behind

Re: [perl #18219] on_exit not portable

2002-11-06 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 13:55 on 11/06/2002 EST, Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Leo said: The on_exit/atexit is currently necessary to clean up behind exceptions. If you don't mind memory leaks after exceptions, remove the Right, I saw that, I just don't understand why. If it's in as a fix for

Re: [perl #18219] on_exit not portable

2002-11-06 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 15:57 on 11/06/2002 EST, Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is was I did say above, just put comments around above statement if tinderboxen are the concern. Yeah, I think I'll do that for right now. What I'd like is a probe for this in configure. Oh, Brent :) If an on-exit

Re: [perl #18219] on_exit not portable

2002-11-05 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 21:09 on 11/05/2002 GMT, Nicholas Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 07:45:46PM -0500, Josh Wilmes wrote: However, that still assumes we have atexit() everywhere. This appears to not be true on SunOS at least- apparently it has on_exit, though. IIRC ANSI C89 says

Re: [perl #18219] on_exit not portable

2002-11-04 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 18:57 on 11/04/2002 +0100, Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: atexit is not an alternative, because we might have multiple interpreters to clean up like in t/op/interp_2. So the issue here is that on_exit can take a parameter to be passed into the handler function, right? We could

Re: miniparrot, a first attempt.

2002-11-01 Thread Josh Wilmes
PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Josh Wilmes wrote: I've banged together a first attempt at a miniparrot- that is, something that can be built on any ANSI C system without anything other than a compiler. Great! I haven't looked deeply, but there is one little quibble I found so

Re: What to do if Digest::MD5 is unavailable?

2002-11-01 Thread Josh Wilmes
I think this solution is the simplest... i'll go ahead and commit it. --Josh At 10:15 on 11/01/2002 PST, Brent Dax [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andy Dougherty: # At the moment, the bytecode fingerprint is built with # Digest::MD5. Alas, Digest::MD5 wasn't standard with perl # versions prior

miniparrot, a first attempt.

2002-10-31 Thread Josh Wilmes
I've banged together a first attempt at a miniparrot- that is, something that can be built on any ANSI C system without anything other than a compiler. Right now, as a proof of concept, it's building a source tree and a shell script which would build miniparrot under gcc. A real version

Re: How to portably link on Win32 (all flavors), OS/2 and VMS?

2002-10-28 Thread Josh Wilmes
If patch [perl #18127] goes in, we can dodge this bullet a while longer :) --Josh At 12:54 on 10/28/2002 EST, Andy Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I need some portability help. In config/auto/stackdir.pl (the stack growth direction test) I want to portably compile and link together three

Re: [PATCH] Probe stack direction at run-time (was Re: Configuring and DOD problems)

2002-10-24 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 11:57 on 10/24/2002 EDT, Jason Gloudon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 11:23:26PM -0400, Josh Wilmes wrote: I've got a patch which switches this detection to happen at run-time instead of at build-time. This is going to be necessary for miniparrot (which has

Re: [PATCH] Probe stack direction at run-time (was Re: Configuring and DOD problems)

2002-10-24 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 18:16 on 10/24/2002 EDT, Jason Gloudon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: STACK_DIR is a compile time constant, so the multiplies in the following code are eliminated by the compiler if it does any optimization. By making STACK_DIR a variable, the compiler is no longer able to do this and has to

[PATCH] Probe stack direction at run-time (was Re: Configuring and DOD problems)

2002-10-23 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 22:58 on 10/23/2002 EDT, Erik Lechak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I fix the errors then It gets all wierd on the def PARROT_STACK_DIR. So I tried to figure out that problem. Anyways, I am on Win XP using VC++. I look in Config.pm and I see this '#define PARROT_STACK_DIR'. It's not

Re: cvs commit: parrot/lib/Parrot/Configure RunSteps.pm

2002-07-18 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 20:15 on 07/18/2002 -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: NOTE: The test file might not work right if the platform doesn't support ff lush(stdout). If someone has a better idea, let me know. Are there platforms which do not? AFAIK, fflush() is specified in the C standard. If you want to

Re: .dev files

2002-07-18 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 14:18 on 07/18/2002 PDT, Brent Dax [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Tanton Gibbs: # So, my final question is: should .dev files be plain text or POD? My vote is for pod. pod is close enough to plain text that I don't see why it shouldn't be in it. Me too. That way you can all come to your

Re: [PATCH] dod.dev

2002-07-18 Thread Josh Wilmes
I really dislike this. --Josh At 22:56 on 07/18/2002 EDT, Melvin Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 06:35 PM 7/18/2002 -0400, Tanton Gibbs wrote: This is the .dev file for dod.c Applied, thanks. They are all in docs/dev now. -Melvin

parrot_coverage

2002-07-17 Thread Josh Wilmes
I noticed this morning that my parrot_coverage cron job was broken, so the stats at http://www.hitchhiker.org/parrot_coverage/ weren't updating properly. They should be correct now. --Josh -- Josh Wilmes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | http://www.hitchhiker.org

Re: [PATCH] .dev files.

2002-07-17 Thread Josh Wilmes
For what it's worth, I agree. I think that when your documentation is tied to the structure of your source files, it only makes sense to put it IN the source files. I don't think you can do literate programming half-way. While I don't think literate programming is the right thing to do to

Re: [PATCH] rx.dev

2002-07-16 Thread Josh Wilmes
Well, the .h files live elsewhere, but yeah, for now I think .dev files should live with the .c files. Unless someone has an alternative suggestion. I'll update make check_source and pdd07 to reflect this. --Josh At 18:14 on 07/16/2002 PDT, John Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Melvin

Re: Streams vs. Descriptors

2002-07-14 Thread Josh Wilmes
I changed io.ops and pretty much the rest of parrot to always go through PIO, which has streams. (or at least handles). I left core.ops alone because I didn't know what the intent was. Are those ops meant to be superseded by the ones in io.ops? IMHO, all IO in parrot should go through PIO, so

Re: coders: add doco

2002-07-14 Thread Josh Wilmes
I'm still catching up on backlogged mailing list mail here, but just to try to be helpful- Like many folks who lurk on this list, I have limited time to do detailed work on parrot internals, much as I would like to. But I am always excited when there's an opportunity to do simple, menial

Re: PARROT QUESTIONS: Use the source, Luke

2002-07-14 Thread Josh Wilmes
Brent, Good stuff. Didn't you also send out a draft PDD about how types should be named and managed in parrot at one point? I, for one, would love to see a PDD that described C-level nanming and namespace management in general. --Josh At 3:11 on 07/14/2002 PDT, Brent Dax [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Streams vs. Descriptors

2002-07-14 Thread Josh Wilmes
enough for the moment. --Josh At 18:22 on 07/14/2002 PDT, Stephen Rawls [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- Josh Wilmes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: IMHO, all IO in parrot should go through PIO, so file descriptors should not be used at all. From io.ops: This will go away when print ops are all

Re: init_method_t for coroutines and subs?

2002-07-05 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 8:55 on 07/05/2002 CDT, David M. Lloyd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It got removed because it wasn't in the spec... Dan directed that we replace it with a version of init that accepts a PMC argument (init_pmc_method_t) that can be used to send in initial size or whatever else you can dream

XML escaping, etc..

2002-07-03 Thread Josh Wilmes
belongs in the core libraries, if not the language itself. --Josh -- Josh Wilmes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | http://www.hitchhiker.org

Re: [netlabs #758] [PATCH] Fixes for example programs

2002-07-03 Thread Josh Wilmes
This patch doesn't want to apply for me: patching file examples/assembly/fact.pasm Hunk #2 FAILED at 35. 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file examples/assembly/fact.pasm.rej patching file examples/assembly/hanoi.pasm Hunk #2 FAILED at 110. 1 out of 6 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects

init_method_t for coroutines and subs?

2002-07-03 Thread Josh Wilmes
, PMC* pmc) perlnum.c:void Parrot_PerlNum_init (struct Parrot_Interp *interpreter, PMC* pmc) perlstring.c:void Parrot_PerlString_init (struct Parrot_Interp *interpreter, PMC* pmc) perlundef.c:void Parrot_PerlUndef_init (struct Parrot_Interp *interpreter, PMC* pmc) -- Josh Wilmes ([EMAIL

Re: [PATCH] 3-arg chopn

2002-07-02 Thread Josh Wilmes
Can you add a test as well? --Josh At 14:37 on 07/02/2002 CDT, brian wheeler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I saw this was a TODO item in core.ops. Brian --- core.ops 1 Jul 2002 17:18:04 - 1.176 +++ core.ops 2 Jul 2002 19:41:44 - @@ -2074,9 +2074,9 @@ =item

Re: Possibility of XS support

2002-06-25 Thread Josh Wilmes
And i think it's worth saying that the XS hook should be a well-behaved parrot extension, once the extension API is defined. Having it get too intertwined with parrot's guts would be a terrible thing. --Josh At 9:42 on 06/25/2002 CDT, Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 8:41 AM -0500

Re: [netlabs #720] [Applied] Core.ops documentation

2002-06-20 Thread Josh Wilmes
Applied. --Josh At 23:55 on 06/20/2002 -, Simon Glover (via RT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: # New Ticket Created by Simon Glover # Please include the string: [netlabs #720] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # URL:

Re: [netlabs #719] [Applied] followup to #709, finding all .pmcs

2002-06-20 Thread Josh Wilmes
Applied. --Josh At 23:25 on 06/20/2002 -, Kevin Falcone (via RT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: # New Ticket Created by Kevin Falcone # Please include the string: [netlabs #719] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # URL:

Re: Fwd: Re: Tasks for the interested

2002-06-18 Thread Josh Wilmes
So now who's going to implement it? (must..contain..urge..) --Josh At 17:03 on 06/18/2002 EDT, Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 6) Infocom's z-machine http://www.gnelson.demon.co.uk/zspec/sect14.html Well, that's one...

Re: Fwd: Re: Tasks for the interested

2002-06-18 Thread Josh Wilmes
Oh man. Now i'm doomed. I guess i'll start playing tonight then ;-) --Josh At 17:20 on 06/18/2002 EDT, Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 5:10 PM -0400 6/18/02, Josh Wilmes wrote: So now who's going to implement it? (must..contain..urge..) You think *you* have to contain

Re: [PATCH] packfile reading

2002-06-10 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 19:33 on 06/10/2002 EDT, Jason Gloudon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Someone may want to write the code to do something useful with the results of stat() when mmap() is not being used. It's supposed to already do that... did i goof? --Josh

[COMMIT] More function/data pointer games..

2002-06-09 Thread Josh Wilmes
FYI. If anyone wants to provide a uintptr_t-equivalent for parrot, i'll happily switch this to use it. --Josh --- Forwarded Message Date:09 Jun 2002 16:44:35 - From:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: cvs commit: parrot/include/parrot parrot.h cvsuser

PIO/io_stdio?

2002-06-07 Thread Josh Wilmes
to be possible at this time. I haven't really dug into the PIO code yet- i wanted to check with whoever had been working on it before I do anything. --Josh -- Josh Wilmes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | http://www.hitchhiker.org

Re: PIO/io_stdio?

2002-06-07 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 10:23 on 06/07/2002 EDT, Melvin Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 03:28 AM 6/7/2002 -0400, Josh Wilmes wrote: It appears that the mechanism for choosing an os layer for PIO could use some work, and it also appears that io_stdio is incomplete. Yes to both. The mechanism: #ifndef

several changes committed (IO, miniparrot)

2002-06-07 Thread Josh Wilmes
chartypes/unicode.o chartypes/usascii.o Found 1922 symbols defined within the 52 supplied object files. Found 56 external symbols Of these, 2 are not defined by ANSI C89: read (in core_ops.o,core_ops_prederef.o) write (in core_ops.o,core_ops_prederef.o) Pretty good! --Josh -- Josh Wilmes

Re: several changes committed (IO, miniparrot)

2002-06-07 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 21:51 on 06/07/2002 PDT, Brent Dax [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: # Of these, 2 are not defined by ANSI C89: # read (in core_ops.o,core_ops_prederef.o) # write (in core_ops.o,core_ops_prederef.o) #=20 # Pretty good! Indeed. Those should probably be surrounded with ifdefs--does

Re: several changes committed (IO, miniparrot)

2002-06-07 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 0:48 on 06/08/2002 EDT, Josh Wilmes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 21:51 on 06/07/2002 PDT, Brent Dax [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd suggest that your next steps include modifying config/gen/config_h.pl to output a has_header.h with only ANSI headers enabled. (Make sure that Configure

Re: 6PAN (was: Half measures all round)

2002-06-06 Thread Josh Wilmes
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 12:55:36AM -0400, Josh Wilmes wrote: Good stuff. Sounds halfway between CPAN.pm and activestate's ppm. See also debian's apt-get. Which brings me to my pet peeve- I think it's time to start doing binary packaging in CPAN

Re: 6PAN (was: Half measures all round)

2002-06-05 Thread Josh Wilmes
Good stuff. Sounds halfway between CPAN.pm and activestate's ppm. See also debian's apt-get. Which brings me to my pet peeve- I think it's time to start doing binary packaging in CPAN, for those who don't want to bother with compilation. That has interesting implications for how we deal

[Patch] fix check_source errors

2002-06-05 Thread Josh Wilmes
A few coding style errors have crept in lately. The attached patch should fix the majority of them. I didn't touch the MANIFEST errors mentioned, though. --Josh $ make check_source | grep ERROR | grep -v '^languages/' byteorder.c:35 (ERROR) Improper indenting for # if INTVAL_SIZE == 4

Re: [netlabs #645] [PATCH] Packfile warnings clean-up

2002-05-31 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 23:25 on 05/31/2002 -, Simon Glover (via RT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: # New Ticket Created by Simon Glover # Please include the string: [netlabs #645] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # URL: http://bugs6.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=645

Re: [netlabs #644] [PATCH] More tests

2002-05-31 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 23:25 on 05/31/2002 -, Simon Glover (via RT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This patch adds tests for the index, depth intdepth ops, as well as adding an extra test for intsave/intrestore. Simon Committed, daddio. --Josh

Re: GC, exceptions, and stuff

2002-05-29 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 15:22 on 05/29/2002 EDT, Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think we'll be safe using longjmp as a C-level exception handler. I'm right now trying to figure whether it's a good thing to do or not. (I'd like to unify C and Parrot level exceptions if I can) Just make sure that we

Re: [APPLIED] Re: First patch to memory allocation routines

2002-05-01 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 15:58 on 05/01/2002 PDT, Steve Fink [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've applied this patch, along with fixing the original resources.c's indentation (re-indenting patches are annoying, but this patch touched enough of resources.c files that it seemed like a golden opportunity.) Here are some

Re: [Applied] Remove redundant declarations

2002-04-16 Thread Josh Wilmes
Applied, thanks. Had to change the chartype.h part a bit, as it didn't want to apply on its own. I am not sure why. Anyway, it's in. Is there a reason not to include -Wredundant_decls in our default warnings flags? --Josh At 22:54 on 04/16/2002 EDT, Simon Glover [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

[Applied] pasm.el

2002-04-14 Thread Josh Wilmes
Marco- i went ahead and added your pasm.el file under parrot/editor/. I'm not familiar enough with the ops to commit your other patch- i'll leave that for someone else. --Josh At 20:21 on 04/14/2002 +0200, Marco Baringer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ok, please pardon the inconvience but

Re: [Applied] String comment fixes

2002-04-11 Thread Josh Wilmes
This one too. --Josh At 19:10 on 04/11/2002 EDT, Simon Glover [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This patch tidies up a few of the comments in string.c, and fixes one actual documentation bug -- namely, string_chopn removes the last n _characters_, not the last n _bytes_. Simon ---

Re: [Applied] Fix up comments in pmc.c

2002-04-11 Thread Josh Wilmes
Cool, applied. At 18:21 on 04/11/2002 EDT, Simon Glover [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We no longer pass a PMC pointer into pmc_new, but the comment hasn't been changed to reflect that. Patch below corrects, and also adds an appropriate comment for pmc_new_sized. Simon --- pmc.c.old

[Applied] Yet another MANIFEST patch

2002-04-06 Thread Josh Wilmes
Applied this one. No time to look at the others tonight, but i'll pick them up if nobody else does. --Josh At 19:03 on 04/06/2002 EST, Simon Glover [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- MANIFEST.old Sat Apr 6 13:35:21 2002 +++ MANIFEST Sat Apr 6 13:37:17 2002 @@ -163,6 +163,7 @@

[Applied] round up of warning fixes

2002-04-03 Thread Josh Wilmes
Thanks, applied! --Josh At 9:49 on 04/03/2002 +0100, Jonathan Stowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is the residue of the warning fixes I have made and which haven't been applied before I start a new working copy :) Index: chartype.c

Re: [PATCH] VMS fixups. Configure hints Makefile syntax

2002-04-01 Thread Josh Wilmes
Committed, thanks. (makes things ugly, but hopefully we'll be replacing the makefile with something more perlish down the road) --Josh At 16:17 on 04/01/2002 EST, Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ok, here's the necessary fixes to the VMS hints and Makefile.in to get VMS to

Re: cvs commit: parrot core.ops

2002-04-01 Thread Josh Wilmes
What is this supposed to do? It breaks the tcc build, and generally looks ungood to me. --Josh At 18:03 on 04/01/2002 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: cvsuser 02/04/01 10:03:29 Modified:.core.ops Log: Minor optimization Revision ChangesPath 1.115

Added macros for interpreter-flags

2002-04-01 Thread Josh Wilmes
--- Forwarded Message Date:02 Apr 2002 06:24:19 + From:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: cvs commit: parrot/io io.c io_win32.c cvsuser 02/04/01 22:24:19 Modified:.core.ops embed.c interpreter.c runops_cores.c include/parrot

Re: PDD formatting issues

2002-04-01 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 1:19 on 04/02/2002 EST, Jeff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I ran across the following errors while running pod2html over the PDDs: The errors from podchecker were better about line numbers, but still, this was helpful. [parrot@damogran pdd]$ pod2html pdd00_pdd.pod pdd00_pdd.html

  1   2   >