Bryan C. Warnock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I count 86 violations of 8.3 in the tree. 8.3-friendly doesn't appear to be
a concern.
The files themselves don't have to be 8.3; however, they should be unique in
lc( substr($base,0,8) . '.' . substr($suffix,0,3) )
Under that rule, I make
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 11:57:25AM +, Dave Mitchell wrote:
duplicate: ./include/parrot/register.h - ./include/parrot/register_funcs.h
This should be regfuncs.h
duplicate: ./languages/miniperl/Miniperl - ./languages/miniperl/miniperlc
Urgh. mpc?
duplicate: ./t/op/pmc_perlarray.t -
so please note that destruction is not collection and they are and can
be separately controlled. you have to stop thinking c++ (which will
probably NOT be directly supported by parrot) and think perlish (or
as other dynamic langs) more. perl doesn't have a delete thing and
doesn't need one.
While I need to get the stacks tests fixed, snag the latest Parrot.
Losing the indirection on the registers gets about a 27% speeduup on
mops.pasm. I think this one's a keeper...
--
Dan
--it's like
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 10:03:53AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, I'm not really interested in Perl at all. If all Parrot can do is
allow me to write a languge that is basically Perl, then I'm not interested
in Parrot either.
To be fair, Uri did say and other dynamic languages. And I
Simon Cozens wrote in perl.perl6.internals:
Similarly, I'd like Parrot/ to move to lib/
And Test/, while you're at it.
But doesn't this require much CVS hackery to keep the revision history?
Don't be the slave of your tools ;-)
--
Rafael Garcia-Suarez
At 4:25 PM + 1/28/02, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
Simon Cozens wrote in perl.perl6.internals:
Similarly, I'd like Parrot/ to move to lib/
And Test/, while you're at it.
But doesn't this require much CVS hackery to keep the revision history?
Don't be the slave of your tools ;-)
I'm
Okay, here's the scoop.
When an interpreter starts, P0 will have either NULL or a PerlArray
with the arguments in it. P1 will be either NULL or have a PerlHash
with the environment in it. If either should actually Do Magic on
alteration, then the appropriate Magic PMC will be in there
Well, I'm not really interested in Perl at all. If all Parrot can do is
allow me to write a languge that is basically Perl, then I'm not
interested
in Parrot either.
I think it may be a good idea to wait until the Parrot folks have their
product and web site a little better documented and
There is no opcodes.pod; I'm assuming the pointer should actually be to
parrot_assembly.pod, as the canonical documentation.
Simon
--- overview.pod.oldMon Jan 28 19:42:55 2002
+++ overview.podMon Jan 28 19:43:06 2002
@@ -65,7 +65,7 @@
These areas will roughly map to compilation
Is a MANIFEST.SKIP a good idea, even if Configure.pl doesn't check it by
default?
Nicholas Clark
- Forwarded message from Nicholas Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
List-Post: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
List-Help: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 1:55 AM -0500 1/28/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
This patch seems to have slipped by in the post New Year's haze. It
updates Parrot's version of Test::More to 0.41 and makes Parrot::Test
use Test::Builder instead of doing Evil things to Test::More.
Where's Test/Builder.pm, though?
--
At 7:46 PM + 1/28/02, Simon Glover wrote:
There is no opcodes.pod; I'm assuming the pointer should actually be to
parrot_assembly.pod, as the canonical documentation.
Applied, thanks.
--
Dan
--it's like
On Mon, 28 Jan 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 4:25 PM + 1/28/02, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
Simon Cozens wrote in perl.perl6.internals:
Similarly, I'd like Parrot/ to move to lib/
And Test/, while you're at it.
But doesn't this require much CVS hackery to keep the revision
On Sat, Nov 10, 2001 at 12:37:24PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
I think we're going to switch over to some sort of key creation op, but I'm
not sure at the moment. Constant keys are easy, of course--they can be
thrown up into the constants section, built at compile-time.
Do constants with
At 11:11 PM + 1/28/02, Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Sat, Nov 10, 2001 at 12:37:24PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
I think we're going to switch over to some sort of key creation op, but I'm
not sure at the moment. Constant keys are easy, of course--they can be
thrown up into the constants
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 04:07:06PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 1:55 AM -0500 1/28/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
This patch seems to have slipped by in the post New Year's haze. It
updates Parrot's version of Test::More to 0.41 and makes Parrot::Test
use Test::Builder instead of doing Evil
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 10:04:43PM +, Jonathan Stowe wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jan 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 4:25 PM + 1/28/02, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
Simon Cozens wrote in perl.perl6.internals:
Similarly, I'd like Parrot/ to move to lib/
And Test/, while you're at it.
Readded the pio_(stdin|stdout|stderr) to make builds work again.
I moved stdin/stdout/stderr to be interp local so you can
use: interpreter-piodata-table[PIO_STDIN_FILENO], etc. now.
Those global pointers should go away because they are null
now anyway.
-Melvin
Revision Changes
At 7:47 PM -0500 1/28/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 04:07:06PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 1:55 AM -0500 1/28/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
This patch seems to have slipped by in the post New Year's haze. It
updates Parrot's version of Test::More to 0.41 and makes
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 09:36:19PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 7:47 PM -0500 1/28/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 04:07:06PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 1:55 AM -0500 1/28/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
This patch seems to have slipped by in the post New Year's haze.
I've just added a new 'Array' type alongside the current PerlArray. Some
target languages may not like to use Perl's array style, so they now can
use the basic Array type. As the test (t/op/pmc_array.t) indicates, no
preallocation is done. I probably need to support exceptions at some
future
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 11:34:22PM -0500, Jeff G wrote:
I've just added a new 'Array' type alongside the current PerlArray. Some
target languages may not like to use Perl's array style, so they now can
use the basic Array type. As the test (t/op/pmc_array.t) indicates, no
preallocation is
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 09:36:19PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 7:47 PM -0500 1/28/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 04:07:06PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 1:55 AM -0500 1/28/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
This patch seems to have slipped by in the post New Year's haze.
At 9:33 PM -0800 1/28/02, Steve Fink wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 09:36:19PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 7:47 PM -0500 1/28/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 04:07:06PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 1:55 AM -0500 1/28/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
This patch seems
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 09:33:06PM -0800, Steve Fink wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 09:36:19PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 7:47 PM -0500 1/28/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 04:07:06PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 1:55 AM -0500 1/28/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 12:39:36AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Dammit, I had that working before I committed things. I'll fix.
Looks like things drifted a bit since I wrote the patch. Want me to
do it over?
--
Michael G. Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/
Perl
At 12:49 AM -0500 1/29/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 12:39:36AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Dammit, I had that working before I committed things. I'll fix.
Looks like things drifted a bit since I wrote the patch. Want me to
do it over?
If you can find where I messed up,
At 9:33 PM -0800 1/28/02, Steve Fink wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 09:36:19PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 7:47 PM -0500 1/28/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 04:07:06PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 1:55 AM -0500 1/28/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
This patch seems
29 matches
Mail list logo
