Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
Let me try again to move the discussion from subjective adjectives to
objective code. Consider:
[ example code ]
If you run this, you will get 1,2,3.
When called as a function, f will return the value of the second
parameter. When called
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
A stripped down PIR-only, pythonless translation is below.
(example: classes aren't global in Python),
Yes, of course. The stripped down means essential the absence of any
lexical handlings. But as you say, this doesn't
, and the implementation
of this function calls __get__ which performs the curry function, per
the Python specifications.
Does Parrot_find_method_with_cache cache the results of the previous
call to find_method?
- Sam Ruby
a Python class defined in
module __main__ would be:
$P1 = findglobal __main__, Foo
getattribute $P2, $P1, 'g'
- Sam Ruby
- while that does change over time, running
code has a tendency to change more slowly than the advice you may receive.
Kevin Tew
___
pirate mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://cornerhost.com/mailman/listinfo/pirate
- Sam Ruby
. Then I was told
that that was all wrong, so I changed it (both the test and the code).
Now Kevin is being told that passing self is all wrong.
Reverting that particular change is not all that difficult. And it can
be done without gutting.
- Sam Ruby
.
Finally, take a look at the third test in
parrot/languages/python/t/basic/func.t
- Sam Ruby
How will Perl6 evaluate defaults?
Like Python:
global x
x=1
def f(p1=x):
return p1
x=2
print f()
or like Ruby:
$x=1
def f(p1=$x)
return p1
end
$x=2
puts f()
- Sam Ruby
P.S. The former prints 1, the latter, 2.
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
On Aug 23, 2005, at 22:48, Sam Ruby wrote:
From December 16, 2004:
http://tinyurl.com/8smmq
Sounds like a really ugly misunderstanding, the more that I've proposed
not to pass the object (P2 in old parlance) out of band. I've stated
several times that calling
Chip Salzenberg wrote:
On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 07:15:41PM -0400, Sam Ruby wrote:
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
I've stated several times that calling conventions need changes to
properly support HLLs with minor success at these times.
With the diversity of HLLs out there, I'm not certain
for December 17, 2004:
r7312 | rubys | 2004-12-17 22:51:48 -0500 (Fri, 17 Dec 2004) | 2 lines
Pass 'self' as the first argument on method calls
- Sam Ruby
, and it is.
For now, I'll probably limit the amount of time I devote to Parrot as
there are plenty of other places where I feel more welcome.
- Sam Ruby
Michal wrote:
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005, Sam Ruby wrote:
[I hope you don't mind me putting this back on the list - I would
prefer that everybody who is interested can follow along and/or
participate]
Kevin Tew wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
Hey guys,
I didn't see this until just now.
Kevin Tew wrote:
Sam
is in the parrot repo already.
What is left - a simple translator - can and should, IMHO, be recoded
into Perl6 once enough of that is running.
- Sam Ruby
[I hope you don't mind me putting this back on the list - I would prefer
that everybody who is interested can follow along and/or participate]
Kevin Tew wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
Kevin Tew wrote:
Sam,
Just wondering what the status is on python/parrot/pirate/pyrate.
These both look outdated.
http
.
- Sam Ruby
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+else if (p-vtable-base_type == enum_class_NCI) {
It was requested[1] that I not add any Python specific methods to the
NCI method... accordingly, the majority of Python methods are morphed to
a PyNCI
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The common cases I want to optimize for are common functions being
called as common functions. And common methods being called as methods.
Yep, that's very reasonable.
The easiest way to optimize for the common methods being called
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+else if (p-vtable-base_type == enum_class_NCI) {
It was requested[1] that I not add any Python specific methods to the
NCI method... accordingly, the majority of Python methods are morphed to
a PyNCI class which subclasses the base NCI class.
- Sam Ruby
[1
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
... But that doesn't
work fur user methods, especially if there is no indication that a user
function is used as a method in the first place.
def find(s, sub):
...
In Python, this is statically determinable
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
WRT functionality: for a call it has to shift up PMC arguments and
insert the object as P5, right?
At the moment, it contains this logic. My plans are to remove the
shifting and set the object into P2 / INTERP
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 5:04 PM -0500 1/18/05, Sam Ruby wrote:
f = Parrot.find
print f(r)
Note that I referenced the method as an attribute, and then called
it as a function.
Mmm, syntax! :) Luckily it makes no difference to us at the parrot
level
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
2) by a distinct Bound_Meth PMC class derived from 1)
The latter is probably cleaner. Binding the object to the callable could
be done e.g. by the Cset_pmc vtable.
That's exactly how PyBoundMeth works today
Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 5:04 PM -0500 1/18/05, Sam Ruby wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
Hi folks.
Welcome back!
Parrot's got the interesting, and somewhat unfortunate, requirement
of having to allow all subroutines behave as methods and all methods
behave as subroutines. (This is a perl 5 thing
Luke Palmer wrote:
Sam Ruby writes:
Mmm, syntax! :) Luckily it makes no difference to us at the parrot
level. What that should translate to is something like:
$P0 = find_method Parrot_string, find
# Elided check for failed lookup and fallback to attribute fetch
$P1 = make_bound_method
Sam Ruby wrote:
Now, what should the code for function f look like? The only
reasonable answer is something along the lines of:
getattribute $P0, P5, 'find'
I doubt that. All languages have different semantics, and we can't
implement them all, because they are conflicting. You, as a compiler
of
instructions executed on invoke (including a nested C stack).
This could all be avoided if there was a VTABLE_callmethod interface as
the code would know that the intent was to only use this found method
exactly once.
*shrug*
Do you plan to choose banana cream again at OSCON 2005?
- Sam Ruby
to standardize on mechanisms.
- Sam Ruby
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Bernhard Schmalhofer (via RT) wrote:
I noticed the there is an interesting mix of 'interpreter' and 'INTERP'
Thanks, applied except dynclasses. I leave that part up for Sam - dunno
if he got diffs there.
Applied.
- Sam Ruby
for
others to use.
- Sam Ruby
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ramblings on creating a new VTABLE_call_method slot to help with
implementing Python's bound vs unbound methods:
http://www.intertwingly.net/blog/2005/01/03/Bound-Methods
1) Methods are functions, where the first parameter is the object.
We
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
How should the following be handled:
f = parrot.index
The CPython code is:
1 0 LOAD_CONST 0 ('parrot')
3 LOAD_ATTR0 (index)
6 STORE_NAME
Ramblings on creating a new VTABLE_call_method slot to help with
implementing Python's bound vs unbound methods:
http://www.intertwingly.net/blog/2005/01/03/Bound-Methods
This is related to a previous discussion on Overloaded Operator Methods:
http://xrl.us/ekh8
- Sam Ruby
like comparing arrays with
large numbers of undefined elements much fiddlier than it should be.
Yep. Currently there is no chance to change that.
If the desire is that two new .Undef values are to be considered equal,
then the attached patch achieves that.
- Sam Ruby
? undef.patch
Index: undef.pmc
(which is at least smart enough to build
the parrot executable).
I've made a fix.
While I obviously have authority to update cvs, as near as I can tell,
my user id is not defined to the parrot bug tracking system.
- Sam Ruby
that... I've committed what I hope to be a fix.
- Sam Ruby
this mailing list will not be suitable for civilized
discussion until Dan gets back.
Meanwhile, all existing Python tests pass:
http://www.intertwingly.net/blog/2004/12/25/Python-on-Parrot-test-status
Merry Christmas.
- Sam Ruby
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
First, a few things to note: the semantics of add vary from language
to language. In particular, add is not guaranteed to be commutative
in Python (think string addition).
Yes, of course.
It seems obvious, but it leads to surprises. Example:
'1' + '2
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
A foo PMC could represent an entire row in a two dimensional MMD, or
an entire plane in a three dimensional MMD, ... etc.
What does it mean: represent a row...? What about the namespace
pollution? Again: where does this hypothetical
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
First, a direct quote from
http://www.perl.com/pub/a/2004/04/16/a12.html?page=10:
Please let's stay at the basics. Please describe your counter proposal
for a very elementary
add Px, Py, Pz
operation.
There's really no need to procede to Perl6 objects
on an instance, as well as reinserting the argument as the
first parameter (shifting each of the curent parameters in the process).
Blech.
- Sam Ruby
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
However, from http://www.perl.com/pub/a/2004/04/16/a12.html?page=10:
Whenever you make a call using subroutine call syntax, it's a
candidate for multiple dispatch.
I read this to mean that the *caller* does nothing
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- nci.pmc7 May 2004 10:33:26 - 1.27
+++ nci.pmc20 Dec 2004 22:27:11 - 1.28
+=item CPMC* get_attr_str(STRING *name)
+
+Return attribute named Cname.
+
+=cut
+
+*/
+
+PMC* get_attr_str(STRING* idx
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
A few things to note: foo is a PMC. It therefore is an object. It
can have state (properties, attributes, etc). It can know how many
arguments are involved in multiple dispatch.
The MMD information can't hang off the Sub PMCs. How
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
What is the rational for this pythonism in Parrot core?
+The line of code in test case t/pie/b3 that motivates this is:
+
+ print using, cmp.__name__
+
+Where cmp may be a NCI subroutine.
Python's builtin cmp is basially a Sub PMC
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
The caller sets:
mmd_flag := NULL ... no MMD, plain method lookup
mmd_flag := depth ... return the next matching method starting
at the given parent search depth
In the general case, how does
cache. Once it is ready and tested, we can explore
setting things up so that the various mmd_dispatch_* functions to
exploit this functionality for the existing predefined binary operations.
- Sam Ruby
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
However, VTABLE_invoke on NCI methods is where the real work is done
(including reading from and writing to registers), and a null dest is
returned.
One more remark:
This is classes/nci.pmc:invoke
void* invoke (void * next) {
Parrot_csub_t func
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
However, VTABLE_invoke on NCI methods is where the real work is done
(including reading from and writing to registers), and a null dest is
returned.
Ouch. Sorry, probably cut'n'paste code, relicts or whatever. runops_*
isn't supposed to be called for NCI
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
However, VTABLE_invoke on NCI methods is where the real work is
done (including reading from and writing to registers), and a null
dest is returned.
Ouch. Sorry, probably cut'n'paste code, relicts or whatever.
runops_
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
But I need to do more than that. I need to do what
Parrot_run_meth_fromc_args is attempting to do (i.e., create a return
continuation and do argument or returnvalue passing.), but correctly.
1) runops_fromc and friends are running *opcodes*, nothing else
2
(fromkeys), Iterator(next), and PerlHash(fromkeys) now?
- Sam Ruby
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't understand this. At all. But the test case added to pyclass.t
(motivated by test 4 in pie/b3.t) only passes if this change to the
get_repr op is made.
[ ... ]
-op get_repr(out STR, in PMC) {
-$1 = $2-vtable-get_repr
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
A few observations, first from an Parrot Internal perspective... in
general, the code for the opcodes tend to do things like the following:
$1-vtable-get_string(interpreter, $1)
Note that the object tends to be repeated as the first argument. It
often
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
+inline op get_repr(out STR, in PMC) {
+STRING *s = $2-vtable-get_repr(interpreter, $2);
+$1 = s;
goto NEXT();
}
Strange. Stranger. Strangest. Did the test fail with JIT/i386 only?
I didn't mean to commit the inline
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
My need is to be able to call add_method for methods defined as @ANON.
This doesn't make sense to me. The @ANON pragma avoids the add_method
(or store_global) call in the first place.
I don't want the method added to a namespace, or stored as a global. I
the invoke couldn't be done immediately prior to
the call to runops?
- Sam Ruby
on dual assumptions: (1) that
wrappers aren't needed in the majority of cases, and (2) every time
someone gets or sets a method, a mapping can be done from language
defined names to Parrot conventions.
Note that in Python, all attributes may potentially be a method.
- Sam Ruby
after
that point, and still retains this new value when control returns to
Parrot_get_repr_s_p.
- Sam Ruby
) at runtime. At the moment, I'm storing this as a property.
- Sam Ruby
into the
equivalent new Px, Ic variety in many cases.
3) The pybuiltin.__load__() function is automatically called by the
library _init loading hook now.
There is one more test in t/dynclases/pybuiltins that has an example.
Cool, thanks!
- Sam Ruby
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
cvsuser 04/12/15 02:36:29
Modified:.vtable.tbl
Log:
stub in object vtables
[snip]
+void add_parent(PMC* parent)
+void become_parent(PMC* class)
+INTVAL class_type()
+void add_method(STRING* method)
+void
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
Before this line is executed,
(gdb) p interpreter-ctx.bp
$1 = (struct parrot_regs_t *) 0x40b6bd88
After the above line is executed:
(gdb) p interpreter-ctx.bp
$2 = (struct parrot_regs_t *) 0x40b6bae8
Then is obviously your implementation of get_repr
were active when the Sub was invoked.
This patch brings Parrot_runops_fromc to parity by providing access to
those registers.
- Sam Ruby
Index: include/parrot/interpreter.h
===
RCS file: /cvs/public/parrot/include/parrot
/dynclass/pybuiltinok
t/dynclass/pyclass..ok
t/dynclass/pyfunc...ok
t/dynclass/pyintok
All tests successful.
Files=4, Tests=37, 8 wallclock secs ( 7.59 cusr + 0.62 csys = 8.21 CPU)
- Sam Ruby
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'll go back and all the necessary interpinfo calls, but I feel
compelled to ask: why isn't P2 passed?
P2 is a non-preserved register and as such rather improper to hold the
object throughout a whole method.
I wasn't assuming is lasted
and documentation of a complete proposal
on how this can work.
- Sam Ruby
P.S. Peeking at the current implementation may not be wise, as a number
of shortcuts were taken (example: int objects behave as their own class,
etc), which confuses the picture.
calls, but I feel
compelled to ask: why isn't P2 passed? It seems to me quite likely that
most methods will want to know what object they are working on.
- Sam Ruby
.sub main @MAIN
newclass $P0, 'c'
find_type $I0, 'c'
new $P1, $I0
new $P2, .PerlInt
$P2 = 1234
setprop $P1, 'p
: No
such file or directory
Try rebuilding after you issue the following from your top level parrot
directory:
perl Configure.pl --prefix=`pwd`
- Sam Ruby
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I continue to disagree with the part of this conclusion where you insert
find_method into the discussion. To give a concrete example: at the
moment the lookup involved in abs_p_p does not involve the use of
find_method.
$ cat abs.imc
.sub
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I took a look into this. Apparently, in Perl5, the result of xor'ing
undef with anything is undef. I'm not suggesting that this is either
right or wrong (it actually was surprising to me),
Yep. It doesn't really follow the definition
Klaas-Jan Stol wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
Klaas-Jan Stol wrote:
Hello,
I just got a fresh cvs checkout, compiled it, compiled pge and tried
to make tcl.
This is what I get:
(cd ../../ ./parrot --output=languages/tcl/lib/tcllib.pbc
languages/tcl/lib/tcllib.imc)
Couldn't load 'tcl_group': tcl_group
) {
const MMD_init _temp_mmd_init[] = {...};
Parrot_mmd_register(interp, entry, _temp_mmd_init, N_MMD_INIT);
}
followed later by the following calls:
Parrot_scalar_mdd_init(interp, entry);
Parrot_Integer_mmd_init(interp, entry);
Parrot_PerlInt_mmd_init(interp, entry);
- Sam Ruby
Eirik Berg Hanssen wrote:
Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I took a look into this. Apparently, in Perl5, the result of xor'ing
undef with anything is undef. I'm not suggesting that this is either
right or wrong (it actually was surprising to me),
Yep
Mike Guy wrote:
Perl5 Cxor always returns a standard boolean value, i.e.
dualvar(0, '') or dualvar(1, '1').Perl6/Parrot should do the same
thing.
Try:
perl -le print 'day' xor 'night'
On the version of Perl I have installed, I get day as the result.
- Sam Ruby
(and likely other
languages).
That is only because the design you have in mind conflates Parrot and
language operations. There is no reason that __abs__ couldn't call
VTABLE_abs, or that __add__ can't make use of MMD_ADD.
- Sam Ruby
Ah! Now we are getting somewhere!
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
So *all* lookups (complete with the asterisks) does not mean *all* lookups.
How about invoke?
Let's first concentrate on simpler stuff like infix operators.
OK, but the point
.
- Sam Ruby
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Here's the part that you snipped that addresses that question:
And there is a piece that I haven't written yet that will do the
reverse: if MMD_ADD is called on a PyObject that has not provided
such behavior
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ snipped - all ok }
If I define an __add__ method with 16 arguments, Python will not throw
an exception.
I didn't write that. I've said: *if* you call it via a + b, Python
throws an exception - that one I've shown. Anyway...
What you wrote
any issues with this plan, please let me know now.
- Sam Ruby
with implicit registers.
new_p_p would be the method signature I would prefer. The name of the
vtable entry could remain instantiate.
- Sam Ruby
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Another good reason to use pmc-vtable-fine_method in *all* lookups. So
the PMC has full control over the dispatch.
How does one lookup the Cfind_method method? That will remain a
VTABLE, entry right?
Yes of course
that a solution emerges that
doesn't involve significant reduction in functionallity. I might be
misunderstanding you, but it sounds to me like you are proposing
ditching lexical pads.
- Sam Ruby
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
correct. I've discovered and analysed the problem with continuations.
I've made a proposal to fix that. No one has said that it's technically
wrong or couldn't work. It seems you are liking the idea, but Dan
doesn't
in
config/init/data.pl as the Tool used to build shared libraries and
dynamically loadable modules.
I can't find anything that fails if this is removed, so I committed the
change.
- Sam Ruby
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
My philosophy is simple: things without test cases tend not not get
fixed, and when fixed, tend not to stay fixed.
There is of course a test case. I have mentioned it at least 20 times ;)
t/op/gc_13.imc - currently
Matt Fowles wrote:
keyword arguments
Sam Ruby wondered how he out to handle keyword arguments to functions.
Dan admitted that this is complex and outlined the cheat he has been
contemplating. No one has either commented on or implemented it yet.
http://xrl.us/d955
Oh, yes, I did
, and then to the
common code which backs it. There are advantages and disadvantages to
making the dispatch methods the same. Ultimately, if they are the same,
the names should be picked in a way that minimizes the possibility of
collisions. If they differ, no such possibility exists.
- Sam Ruby
Test case attached.
- Sam Ruby
Index: t/pmc/perlhash.t
===
RCS file: /cvs/public/parrot/t/pmc/perlhash.t,v
retrieving revision 1.48
diff -u -r1.48 perlhash.t
--- t/pmc/perlhash.t1 Oct 2004 21:16:52 - 1.48
+++ t/pmc
used, will operate correctly by
invoking to the opcodes.
I *don't* see a need to heavily optimize for rarely used mechanisms.
I encourage you to check out Pirate. The IMCC output of pirate.py is
now remarkably close to the output of pie-thon.pl.
- Sam Ruby
]: print j(a=1,b=2,c=3)
for j in [f,g]: print j(*args.values())
for j in [f,g]: print j(**args)
I see nothing in pdd 03 that provides any guidance as to how to handle
this. What makes this issue so critical is that any solution will
potentially affect *every* function.
- Sam Ruby
P.S
Jeff Clites wrote:
On Nov 27, 2004, at 5:58 PM, liorean wrote:
On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 19:30:20 -0500, Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Overall, JavaScript would be a good match for Parrot. One place
where it would significantly diverge at the moment is in the concept
of a class. Objects
with this
deprecation as well as introduction of the new push_eh opcode.
All that being said, would it make sense to collect these type of
changes to a single place in CVS or on the web?
A simple CHANGES file in CVS, with a list of interfaces deprecated and
removed since 0.1.1 would sufficient.
- Sam
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
There are likely some more inconsistencies, which should be fixed rather
sooner then later.
One that I noticed:
=item Bgetattribute(out PMC, in PMC, in STR)
=item Bgetprop(out PMC, in STR, in PMC)
- Sam Ruby
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
cvsuser 04/11/19 08:28:06
Modified:imcc/t/imcpasm opt0.t optc.t pcc.t
imcc/t/syn bsr.t
Log:
replace invoke P1 in imcc tests
Revision ChangesPath
1.7 +2 -2 parrot/imcc/t/imcpasm/opt0.t
[snip]
- invoke P1/
+ returncc/
Sam Ruby wrote:
A patch is attached, but it bears a little discussion.
Well, that didn't exactly work. I've since commmitted these patches,
and more. A the moment, all the python and pirate unit tests pass. (Woot!)
In the absense of other direction, I plan to write more tests and use
them
, with the exception of
the getprop test mentioned above.
I've also posted more thoughts and background at [4].
- Sam Ruby
[1] http://intertwingly.net/stories/2004/11/09/parrot/
[2] http://intertwingly.net/stories/2004/11/09/parrot.tgz
[3] http://intertwingly.net/stories/2004/11/09/pirate/
[4] http
need to post a big bold
lighthouse at.
If you can wait a few weeks, I'm willing to take a stab at it, but just
not yet. If somebody else takes the lead, I will certainly contribute.
- Sam Ruby
, there will need to be a check to ensure
that the method to be called was, in fact, overridden. If not, a
type_error exception will be thrown.
- Sam Ruby
1 - 100 of 145 matches
Mail list logo
