For a bit of background: the goal is to someday eliminate type IDs
entirely from Parrot. They're fundamentally broken, because they assume
a static class set in a flat namespace. They assume that the type ID
assigned to a class will be identical when you freeze and thaw bytecode,
which isn't
John M. Dlugosz 提到:
In S29, there are definitions like
our Capture method shape (@array: ) is export
But in S12 there is no mention as to what an our method is. It states that
my is used to make private methods, and ^ to make class methods.
I think this is a doc relic and should be fixed
# New Ticket Created by Seneca Cunningham
# Please include the string: [perl #52398]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=52398
I'm creating a new ticket instead of possibly making use of the one
mentioned
# New Ticket Created by Seneca Cunningham
# Please include the string: [perl #52396]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=52396
prove -v output for the test:
t/pmc/io...1..45
not ok 1 -
Seems to work now, once I clean up my client side. (Had to do a little svn
cleanup and remove the old directory before it would go through, but now it
looks good.)
Ted Neward
Java, .NET, XML Services
Consulting, Teaching, Speaking, Writing
http://www.tedneward.com
-Original Message-
Yep!
ls /usr/local/lib | grep 'parrot'
give my many targets for rm and after that parrot making very well. Thanks!
On 02/04/2008, Andy Dougherty via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 1 Apr 2008, Christian Aperghis-Tramoni wrote:
I have exactly the same problem under a Debian system.
The error still persists with version 0.6.0 on 10.5.2 PPC as of svn
revision 26699.
This bug is the same, or at least similar to [perl #48971]
Cheers,
Walter Szeliga
On Wed, 2 Apr 2008, �~Xл�~L�~O wrote:
Yep!
ls /usr/local/lib | grep 'parrot'
give my many targets for rm and after that parrot making very well. Thanks!
This very minimal patch at leasts gives a brief warning about the issue.
On a closely related topic, I thought about changing the default
I just finished another pass on S09v24, and in this posting I note editorial
issues with the file that can easily be corrected. This is as opposed to
subjects for deep discussion, which I'll save for later and individual posts.
= on Mixing subscripts
Within a C.[] indexing operation...
Why the
Andy Dougherty a écrit :
On Tue, 1 Apr 2008, Christian Aperghis-Tramoni wrote:
I have exactly the same problem under a Debian system.
Configure works properly but make ends with the same message error :
pbc_to_exe.o: In function `main':
pbc_to_exe.c:(.text+0x64): undefined reference to
Author: kjs
Date: Wed Apr 2 05:40:30 2008
New Revision: 26703
Modified:
trunk/docs/pdds/draft/pdd29_compiler_tools.pod
Log:
[pdd29] give pdd29 a first swing
Modified: trunk/docs/pdds/draft/pdd29_compiler_tools.pod
Walter M Szeliga via RT wrote:
The error still persists with version 0.6.0 on 10.5.2 PPC as of svn
revision 26699.
This bug is the same, or at least similar to [perl #48971]
Cheers,
Walter Szeliga
I downloaded and ran make on 0.6.0 and found the same thing.
Jim
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 4:50 AM, Christian Aperghis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andy Dougherty a écrit :
On Tue, 1 Apr 2008, Christian Aperghis-Tramoni wrote:
I have exactly the same problem under a Debian system.
Configure works properly but make ends with the same message error :
John M. Dlugosz 提到:
= on Parallelized parameters and autothreading
use autoindex;
do { @c[$^i, $^j, $^k, $^l] = @a[$^i, $^j] * @b[$^k, $^l] };
Shouldn't those be semicolons? Ditto for subsequent examples.
Also, what does the do do? I think it is only meaningful if there was
Audrey Tang 提到:
John M. Dlugosz 提到:
= on Parallelized parameters and autothreading
use autoindex;
do { @c[$^i, $^j, $^k, $^l] = @a[$^i, $^j] * @b[$^k, $^l] };
Shouldn't those be semicolons? Ditto for subsequent examples.
Also, what does the do do? I think it is only meaningful
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 11:02:37PM +0800, Audrey Tang wrote:
: Sanity-check before I check it in?
I'm probably not the best person to ask about *sanity*, but it looks
pretty darn good to me. :)
Larry
John M. Dlugosz 提到:
But about your answer, automatically called with no arguments. Isn't
that what a bare closure normally does anyway? Say, I introduced extra
{} just for scoping or naming the block, where a statement is expected.
foo;
bar;
{ my $temp= foo; bar(temp); } #forget about
Author: audreyt
Date: Wed Apr 2 09:13:06 2008
New Revision: 14533
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S09.pod
Log:
* S09/Autovivification:
Change the wording assignment implicitly binds a copy to
assignment is treated the same way as binding to a copy container,
because assignment and
On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 03:22:28PM -0500, Joshua McAdams wrote:
Allison wrote:
Also, we're planning a hackathon the weekend before YAPC::NA,
June 14-15, for core hacking, language implementation, and cage cleaning.
The YAPC::NA wiki [1] currently says that the hackathon will be
the days
On Apr 2, 2008, at 11:12 AM, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
IIRC, there's not really a conference hotel for IIT.
The dorms.
--
Andy Lester = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = www.petdance.com = AIM:petdance
Author: audreyt
Date: Wed Apr 2 08:56:38 2008
New Revision: 14532
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S09.pod
Log:
* S09/Parallelized parameters and autothreading:
@a[$i, $j] etc in examples should read @a[$i; $j] instead.
Also, clarify that do - { ... } is intentionally calling the
block
John M. Dlugosz 提到:
I just finished another pass on S09v24, and in this posting I note
editorial issues with the file that can easily be corrected. This is as
opposed to subjects for deep discussion, which I'll save for later and
individual posts.
= on Mixing subscripts
Within a C.[]
Hmm, both of you are kinda going off on a tangent here. The meaning of
the Whatever represented by * is neither something that gets magically
interpreted before postcircumfix:[ ], nor is it a compile-time
rewrite. Context is supplied by binding in Perl 6, and the binding
happens within .[].
I understand. Thank you.
This ought to be mentioned in S12. Perhaps after the treatment on my,
explain that our is the default, but saying it explicitly allows the
return type to be first.
--John
Audrey Tang audreyt-at-audreyt.org |Perl 6| wrote:
John M. Dlugosz 提到:
In S29, there are
On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 12:04:47AM +0800, Audrey Tang wrote:
: I guess the wording in the last parenthesized parens is insufficiently
: explicit, and maybe we should change it to say that it's really a syntax
: error to use placeholder blocks in statement positions. Sounds reasonable?
Yes,
Author: larry
Date: Wed Apr 2 09:43:45 2008
New Revision: 14534
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
Log:
Some fossil unspace verbiage cleaned up on recommendation of John M. Dlugosz++
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
Larry Wall 提到:
Yes, unless we decide we need something like that for list
comprehensions. Maybe looping modifiers allow placeholders in what
would otherwise be an error...
Sure. How about this:
Use of a placeholder parameter in statement-level blocks triggers a
syntax error, because the
Author: larry
Date: Wed Apr 2 09:49:48 2008
New Revision: 14535
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
Log:
Another fix suggested by John M. Dlugosz++, whose name I can almost spell now.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 04:35:56PM -, John M. Dlugosz wrote:
: Meta-question 2: Does this belong on a different mailing list? I'm also
including the documented file maintainer as a direct recipient.
This is the right list. There is no need to cc the maintainers,
since they all read this
On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 12:43:58AM +0800, Audrey Tang wrote:
Larry Wall 提到:
Yes, unless we decide we need something like that for list
comprehensions. Maybe looping modifiers allow placeholders in what
would otherwise be an error...
Sure. How about this:
Use of a placeholder parameter
On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 09:27:48PM -0500, John M. Dlugosz wrote:
Having done that before, I find the Perl 6 technical docs to be in relative
disarray and imprecise.
Indeed, I welcome all the help I can get on making things more precise.
My own tendency is to emphasize vigor over rigor, so I
Author: audreyt
Date: Wed Apr 2 10:22:01 2008
New Revision: 14536
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S04.pod
Log:
* S04: Create a new section, Statement-level bare blocks
since its content doesn't really belong in the do-once loop
section.
* S04: Also, clarify that statement-level blocks
Larry Wall 提到:
I was originally thinking just loop modifiers, but I suppose
{ say $^x } if foo();
also can be made to make some kind of sense, in the same way that
if foo() - $x { say $x }
is supposed to work.
Right. I've committed the clarification (as a new section).
Author: larry
Date: Wed Apr 2 11:02:36 2008
New Revision: 14537
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.pod
Log:
typo from Jon Lang++
clarify innards of () and [] slightly
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
Thanks for the direction here, very helpful.
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 3:28 AM, Allison Randal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For a bit of background: the goal is to someday eliminate type IDs entirely
from Parrot. They're fundamentally broken, because they assume a static
class set in a flat
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 10:03:57AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
Yes, current STD has the inside of () and [] as statementlist,
which throws away all but the last statement. Arguably [] at least
should probably be semilist though, and maybe () too.
my @x := [{1+1}; {2+2}]; @x is currently
Author: audreyt
Date: Wed Apr 2 12:04:08 2008
New Revision: 14538
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.pod
Log:
* S03/Hash composer:
Update the definition to agree with S04/hash composer, allowing
empty hashes as well as lists beginning with hashes.
Modified:
Nicholas Clark 提到:
So if the semicolon is replaced with a comma, like this,
my @x := [{1+1}, {2+2}];
the {} acts as a hash constructor, and @x is [{2 = undef}, {4 = undef}] ?
No, {} acts as a closure constructor, and @x contains two closures that
returns 2 and 4 respectively when
hi,
i have some remarks/proposals on the current PDD 19 (PIR).
It already is full with proposals and issues that must be resolved
before it can be pushed out of draft status, but I figured now is the
time (as it will soon be worked on, I heard)
shall i provide this as a patch, or can i go ahead
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 12:29 PM, Klaas-Jan Stol [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hi,
i have some remarks/proposals on the current PDD 19 (PIR).
It already is full with proposals and issues that must be resolved
before it can be pushed out of draft status, but I figured now is the
time (as it
Can we get an idea of how many parrot hackers are planning on
attending YAPC::EU this year? (will be held in Copenhagen, Denmark, on
13-15 August 2008.)
http://www.yapceurope2008.org/ye2008/
I am actually a maybe at this point.
--
Will Coke Coleda
/me raises his hand (although he is not properly a parrot hacker)
Will Coleda wrote:
Can we get an idea of how many parrot hackers are planning on
attending YAPC::EU this year? (will be held in Copenhagen, Denmark, on
13-15 August 2008.)
http://www.yapceurope2008.org/ye2008/
I am actually a
Thom Boyer 提到:
Audrey Tang wrote:
$code = { a = 1, $b, $c == print };
The examples above are from LS04/Statement parsing.
According to those rules, that last assignment to $code seems to be a
hash, not code. Or does the C == mean that the contents aren't a
list?
Correct, because ==
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 04:34:47PM -0400, Will Coleda wrote:
Can we get an idea of how many parrot hackers are planning on
attending YAPC::EU this year? (will be held in Copenhagen, Denmark, on
13-15 August 2008.)
http://www.yapceurope2008.org/ye2008/
I am actually a maybe at this point.
On Wednesday 02 April 2008 04:50:23 Christian Aperghis wrote:
Andy Dougherty a écrit :
On Tue, 1 Apr 2008, Christian Aperghis-Tramoni wrote:
I have exactly the same problem under a Debian system.
Configure works properly but make ends with the same message error :
pbc_to_exe.o: In
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 9:34 PM, Will Coleda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can we get an idea of how many parrot hackers are planning on
attending YAPC::EU this year? (will be held in Copenhagen, Denmark, on
13-15 August 2008.)
http://www.yapceurope2008.org/ye2008/
I am actually a maybe at
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 6:54 PM, Nuno 'smash' Carvalho
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 9:34 PM, Will Coleda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can we get an idea of how many parrot hackers are planning on
attending YAPC::EU this year? (will be held in Copenhagen, Denmark, on
Larry Wall larry-at-wall.org |Perl 6| wrote:
On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 09:27:48PM -0500, John M. Dlugosz wrote:
Having done that before, I find the Perl 6 technical docs to be in relative
disarray and imprecise.
Indeed, I welcome all the help I can get on making things more precise.
My
Regarding the text just before where you rewrote,
then the compiler adds defaults for you, something like:
- $x = @foo.shape[0].range,
$y = @foo.shape[1].range { @foo[$x;$y] }
where each such range is autoiterated for you.
That doesn't really work. If
Audrey Tang audreyt-at-audreyt.org |Perl 6| wrote:
I guess the wording in the last parenthesized parens is insufficiently
explicit, and maybe we should change it to say that it's really a syntax
error to use placeholder blocks in statement positions. Sounds reasonable?
Cheers,
Audrey
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 07:03:46PM -0500, John M. Dlugosz wrote:
During ANSI/ISO standardization, they basically took every phrase and made
it more and more exact. It went from understandable to leagaleze over a
period of years, with sentences growing more and more detail. I could
still
Larry Wall larry-at-wall.org |Perl 6| wrote:
Now, you'll ask how *-2 works. If you do math on a Whatever object,
it just remembers that offset until the Whatever is given a meaning,
which, in this case, is delayed until the subscripting operator
decides what the size of the next dimension is.
Larry Wall larry-at-wall.org |Perl 6| wrote:
At compile time the subscript parser really only knows how
many dimensions are referred to by how many semicolons there
are. A subscript that is explicitly cast to @@ is known to be
multidimensional, and interpolates the returned List of Capture into
In Question on your last change to S02, Larry Wall wrote:
(By the way, you'll note the utility of being able to talk about a
postfix by saying .[], which is one of the reasons we allow the optional
dot there. :)
Can I take this as an indication that the rules for postcircumfix
operators are
On Wed, 2 Apr 2008, chromatic wrote:
We're not seeing the problem in the parrot executable, just the pbc_to_exe
executable, which makes me believe that the attached patch will fix
the problem.
We rearranged the linker flags for the parrot executable to avoid this
a while back, so we ought
On Fri Mar 28 07:07:37 2008, coke wrote:
perlcritic is passing all tests at the moment. Added back to the set of
default tests run in r26591. Closing ticket.
I'm re-opening this ticket due to problems I have experienced since
r26591 with t/codingstd/perlcritic.t on two different OSes.
I did not experience the problem, but at least I can report that
applying the patch causes no harm on either 386-linux-debian or
ppc-darwin (OS X 10.4).
Example, on Linux:
Linked: perl6
Hello, world
On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 11:07:43AM -0700, Bernhard Schmalhofer wrote:
# New Ticket Created by Bernhard Schmalhofer
# Please include the string: [perl #52382]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=52382
On Wednesday 02 April 2008 06:26:40 Andy Dougherty wrote:
This very minimal patch at leasts gives a brief warning about the issue.
--- parrot-svn/config/inter/libparrot.pm 2008-03-31 15:15:42.0
-0400 +++ parrot-andy/config/inter/libparrot.pm 2008-04-02
09:20:30.0
59 matches
Mail list logo
