Re: Butt-ugliness reduction

2001-11-17 Thread Alan Burlison
Dave Mitchell wrote: * Is there ever any need to for a PMC type which holds both an int and a num? In the Perl 5 case we were constrained by code that expected to always find an int (or a num) in a fixed slot in the SV; with PMCs, all access to these slots is via methods, so an int-num or

Re: Butt-ugliness reduction

2001-11-17 Thread davem
Alan Burlison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dave Mitchell wrote: * Is there ever any need to for a PMC type which holds both an int and a num? In the Perl 5 case we were constrained by code that expected to always find an int (or a num) in a fixed slot in the SV; with PMCs, all access

Re: Butt-ugliness reduction

2001-11-17 Thread Jason Gloudon
On Sat, Nov 17, 2001 at 02:22:44PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Alan Burlison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dave Mitchell wrote: * Is there ever any need to for a PMC type which holds both an int and a num? In the Perl 5 case we were constrained by code that expected to always

Size of integer register vs sizeof(void *)

2001-11-17 Thread brian wheeler
Are there any cases where a void * cannot be placed into an integer register? It seems like it shouldn't happen, especially since jump and jsr are supposed to take an integer register and they point to a host-machine-address... Brian

Re: Size of integer register vs sizeof(void *)

2001-11-17 Thread Segher Boessenkool
brian wheeler wrote: Are there any cases where a void * cannot be placed into an integer register? It seems like it shouldn't happen, especially since jump and jsr are supposed to take an integer register and they point to a host-machine-address... Brian Some Alpha's are 32 bit int /

Re: memory assumptions

2001-11-17 Thread Dan Sugalski
[Sorry this has taken so long (as has the rest of my replies to the list). Between work and the LL1 workshop it's been busy] At 11:59 PM 11/12/2001 -0500, Michael L Maraist wrote: 1) Are we allowing _any_ dynamic memory to be non-GC-managed? Yes. We'll have the case where some memory must be

Re: Lexical implementation work

2001-11-17 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 10:10 PM 11/13/2001 -0500, Ken Fox wrote: QUESTIONS! Who owns the bytecode format? How do I propose changes? Nobody in particular at the moment, and note your change proposals to the list. I need a scope definition section. Each scope is assigned a per-module id. I'm not sure what info is

Re: Lexical implementation work

2001-11-17 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 03:03 PM 11/12/2001 -0500, Michael L Maraist wrote: From the above, the only uses I can see for declaring my $foo as int is to set flags (or utilize different vtables) to enforce integerness, and to say to the optimizer that it's ok to use a primitive integer if the block contained a divide.

Re: Butt-ugliness reduction

2001-11-17 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 08:10 PM 11/15/2001 +, Simon Cozens wrote: On Thu, Nov 15, 2001 at 02:58:58PM -0500, Michael L Maraist wrote: Why are you storing flags for PerlScalarData inside the pmc-flags? I'm saying that classes can have user-defined flags, to save a dereference. Or at least, I'm saying that until

Re: Map and Batch Operations on Arrays

2001-11-17 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 01:09 AM 11/15/2001 +0200, Shlomi Fish wrote: Those who read Apocalypse 3 (and everybody here should because the Apocalypses describe what we plan to implement) would know that Larry Wall decided to implement batch operations on arrays. Hence it would be possible to add two arrays in order to

Re: Proper Tail Recursion

2001-11-17 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 01:03 AM 11/15/2001 +0200, Shlomi Fish wrote: What is the current stance on implementing proper tail recursion in perl6? In perl it's unlikely. (unless you consider redone blocks tail recursion, which they sort of are) In Parrot we can do it. I'll think about it to make sure it's easily

Re: JIT compilation

2001-11-17 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 03:32 PM 11/16/2001 +0100, Paolo Molaro wrote: On 11/08/01 Benoit Cerrina wrote: I heard that, I was thinking that it would be great to run ruby on mono but ruby is very dynamic (like perl but since its so much easier to use and program it is also easier to redefine the methods and

Re: Butt-ugliness reduction

2001-11-17 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 01:24 PM 11/16/2001 +, Dave Mitchell wrote: * I think that the cache of a PMC ought to be more flexible, eg replace DPOINTER *data; union { INTVAL int_val; FLOATVAL num_val; DPOINTER *struct_val; } cache; with something like union { INTVAL int_val;