$ENV{ICU_DATA_DIR}

2004-05-30 Thread Steve Fink
Anyone mind if I commit this? One thing I'm not sure of, though -- I try to behave myself and use Parrot_getenv rather than a plain getenv(), but I'm not convinced the API is complete -- Parrot_getenv saves back a boolean saying whether to free the returned string or not, but what should I call to

Re: FW: Periodic Table of the Operators

2004-05-30 Thread Gabriel Ebner
Hello, Joe Gottman wrote: The zip operator is now the Yen sign (). How are those without a US keyboard supposed to type this? Gabriel. -- Gabriel Ebner - reverse [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: compiler-faq

2004-05-30 Thread Leopold Toetsch
William Coleda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was going to submit this as a patch, but I ended up with a conflict, and Dan threatened he wouldn't apply it anyway, so I'll just post it here for comment. Feel free to apply any or all of it. I would be very happy to hear of a better way to answer

Re: Layering PMCs

2004-05-30 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Stéphane Payrard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To avoid to go back the slow world of perl5 where many things need to be tested before figuring what to do, performancewise, there is little choice but to have two versions of each PMC class, a fast one that is devoid of property support and another

Re: Layering PMCs

2004-05-30 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We need the ability to layer PMCs. Nothing new, we need something of the sort for transparent read-only-ness and probably thread-safety What about the current implementation [1]: * PMCs that have read-only variants have the Cconst_too flag set * the PMC

Re: $ENV{ICU_DATA_DIR}

2004-05-30 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Steve Fink [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyone mind if I commit this? The patch is fine. ... One thing I'm not sure of, though -- I try to behave myself and use Parrot_getenv rather than a plain getenv(), but I'm not convinced the API is complete -- Parrot_getenv saves back a boolean saying

Re: FW: Periodic Table of the Operators

2004-05-30 Thread Dave Whipp
It probably depends on what nationality that keyboard is for. If its Japanese, you probably won't have a problem ;-). But for the rest of us, use Vi and ctrl-KYe (or spacezipspace). Dave. Gabriel Ebner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Hello, Joe Gottman wrote:

Re: FW: Periodic Table of the Operators

2004-05-30 Thread Smylers
Gabriel Ebner writes: Joe Gottman wrote: The zip operator is now the Yen sign (¥). How are those without a US keyboard supposed to type this? Probably the same way as those with US keyboards do -- US keyboards don't have a yen symbol on them either. In 'Vim' I got lucky in guessing

Re: Layering PMCs

2004-05-30 Thread Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon
Leopold Toetsch wrote: Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We need the ability to layer PMCs. Nothing new, we need something of the sort for transparent read-only-ness and probably thread-safety What about the current implementation [1]: * PMCs that have read-only variants have the Cconst_too

Re: FW: Periodic Table of the Operators

2004-05-30 Thread Rod Adams
Smylers wrote: Gabriel Ebner writes: Joe Gottman wrote: The zip operator is now the Yen sign (¥). How are those without a US keyboard supposed to type this? On Windows you can probably press Alt Gr then type in some number. Close. AltGr-Minus. If you're using the

Re: compiler-faq

2004-05-30 Thread TOGoS
Your answer is about compiling a subroutine that does something. What's wrong with the current wording: How do I generate a sub call with a variable-length parameter list in PIR? Use unprototyped calls and functions and pass as many arguments as you have. Well, for one

Re: compiler-faq

2004-05-30 Thread Sterling Hughes
Leopold Toetsch wrote: William Coleda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was going to submit this as a patch, but I ended up with a conflict, and Dan threatened he wouldn't apply it anyway, so I'll just post it here for comment. Feel free to apply any or all of it. I would be very happy to hear of a

Re: Layering PMCs

2004-05-30 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Leopold Toetsch wrote: Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We need the ability to layer PMCs. Nothing new, we need something of the sort for transparent read-only-ness and probably thread-safety What about the current implementation [1]: *