The release process for v5.3.4 has begun: the `release' branch was
created for any work that is left and is now bumped to v5.3.3.900. You
can go on using the `master' branch as usual, it is now bumped to
v5.3.4.1 (to avoid having two different trees with the same version).
If you have any
This is a (long) criticism of the current state of the package system.
(It is a by-product of PR13669, where I raised that point.)
Executive summary: I very strongly think that pkg create should
change. See the bottom for my suggestion.
* Most code development happens in a single collection
I stand by my recommendation from December:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev/archive/2012-December/011218.html
That is, I think this suggestion should be phrased as a patch.
As implied in my quote below, I tried something much like you're
describing, and I was unhappy with the resulting
A few minutes ago, Matthew Flatt wrote:
I stand by my recommendation from December:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev/archive/2012-December/011218.html
That is, I think this suggestion should be phrased as a patch.
As implied in my quote below, I tried something much like you're
I've pushed changes to the JIT to add an ARM back-end, which is based
on Paulo César Pereira de Andrade's very nice implementation of GNU
lightning for ARM.
The generated code uses Thumb and VFP instructions when available, and
floating-point arithmetic is unboxed as on x86.
Places should work,
Matthew wouldn't ask for a patch if he wanted you to go thru the work and would
reject the patch out of hand. If, however, the patch is delete design
completely, use this one instead, he and the rest of dev may reject it too. In
between all shades of grey. -- Matthias
On Apr 8, 2013, at
On 04/08/2013 03:58 PM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
I've pushed changes to the JIT to add an ARM back-end, which is based
on Paulo César Pereira de Andrade's very nice implementation of GNU
lightning for ARM.
The generated code uses Thumb and VFP instructions when available, and
floating-point
At Mon, 08 Apr 2013 16:15:03 -0500, Brian Mastenbrook wrote:
On 04/08/2013 03:58 PM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
I've pushed changes to the JIT to add an ARM back-end, which is based
on Paulo César Pereira de Andrade's very nice implementation of GNU
lightning for ARM.
On what processors is
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Eli Barzilay e...@barzilay.org wrote:
This is a (long) criticism of the current state of the package system.
(It is a by-product of PR13669, where I raised that point.)
Executive summary: I very strongly think that pkg create should
change. See the bottom for
50 minutes ago, Jay McCarthy wrote:
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Eli Barzilay e...@barzilay.org wrote:
It all starts at how someone is expected to approach developing a
package, regardless of how this is defined in the current
system. A quick way to get to the core of the problem is to
I probably shouldn't jump into this because I've barely used the new
package system, but here I go...
On 04/08/2013 03:17 PM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
50 minutes ago, Jay McCarthy wrote:
I don't see how you can start from this place and say, I am making
the elis-awesome-stuff package, so therefore
11 matches
Mail list logo
