[perl #85750] Test failures on OpenBSD
bartolin masak: S03-operators/arith.t mentions http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Indeterminate.html, as I understand it this argues in favour of 1 ** Inf == NaN masak bartolin: sure, I'm already concinced that *math* makes the argument for 1 ** Inf == NaN. masak but IEEE 754 deviates from math in some places where it finds doing so convenient in a computing environment. masak for example, 0 ** 0 masak m: say 0 ** 0 camelia rakudo-moar d60a8f: OUTPUT«1» masak m: say Inf ** 0 camelia rakudo-moar d60a8f: OUTPUT«1» bartolin ok, just wanted to note the link masak bartolin: yes -- thank you. masak bartolin: adding to ticket.
[perl #122746] [BUG] Stringification of AST parameter not captured properly in postfix macro in Rakudo
masak ():
masak m: macro postfix:!!($o) { quasi { die Null check failed for
, $o.Str unless defined {{{$o}}}; {{{$o}}} } }; say 42!!; my
$cookies; my $food = $cookies!!
16:18 +camelia rakudo-moar 51ddd5: OUTPUT«42Null check failed for 
in any [...]»
masak so close.
* masak submits rakudobug
masak (it should capture the string '$cookies' in $o.Str, IMO)
masak that is, the error message shoulda been 'Null check failed for
$cookies'
This works now, thanks for moritz++.
$ cat RT-122746-code
macro postfix:!!($o) {
quasi {
die Null check failed for , $o.Str
unless defined {{{$o}}};
{{{$o}}}
}
}
say 42!!;
my $cookies;
my $food = $cookies!!
masak@siddharta ~/mine/macro-grant $ perl6 RT-122746-code
42
Null check failed for $cookies
in any at RT-122746-code:3
in block unit at RT-122746-code:12
Marking ticket as testneeded.
[perl #111964] [BUG] LTA error message when passing an Int argument to base conversion in Rakudo
The error message now hopefully is adequat: my $x=31; say :8($x) You have confused the number 31 with the textual representation 31; if you wanted to render the number in the given base, use $number.base($radix) in block unit at unknown file:1 There is a test for the correct exception type (X::Numeric::Confused) in S02-literals/radix.t
[perl #122882] [BUG] Symmetric set difference (^) doesn't right-associate or chain in Rakudo
lizmat $ 6 'say a network (^) b network (^) a network' lizmat set(b) lizmat #122882 can be marked as TEST NEEDED :-) Marked as testneeded.
state and = vs :=
Does ‘state’ govern ‘:=’ the way it governs ‘=’? In other words, just as this: state $x = 1; only assigns to $x once (per closure), does the same apply to this? state $x := $y; I can’t find anything in the specs that implies that it does. The reason I ask is that I am currently implementing binding for Perl 5, but the syntax is different— \$x = \$y; (The reason for the different syntax is that, when we tried to use :=, we could not find a coherent way to handle edge cases [e.g., flattening vs not flattening]. Reusing existing Perl 5 syntax seemed the most straightforward and intuitive approach.) —and I am debating whether \state $x = \$y should bind only once or every time the surrounding code is executed. I could argue it either way (though I am leaning toward the latter), so I thought to find out what Perl 6 does.
[perl6/specs] f11c62: Add inner link for Adverbial Pair forms
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/perl6/specs Commit: f11c62c8168ff39d40c355c98f4d4c69a33a3c92 https://github.com/perl6/specs/commit/f11c62c8168ff39d40c355c98f4d4c69a33a3c92 Author: Elizabeth Mattijsen l...@dijkmat.nl Date: 2014-10-01 (Wed, 01 Oct 2014) Changed paths: M S02-bits.pod Log Message: --- Add inner link for Adverbial Pair forms
[perl #122879] REPL broken on Parrot
# New Ticket Created by Sami Boukortt # Please include the string: [perl #122879] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # URL: https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=122879 The REPL of Rakudo 2014.09 on Parrot doesn't show the prompt anymore, and if it is given any input (even an empty line), it exits with the following message: seek failed: -1 current instr.: '' pc 26739 (gen/parrot/stage2/NQPHLL.pir:10264) (gen/parrot/stage2/NQPHLL.nqp:1084) called from Sub 'interactive' pc 26661 (gen/parrot/stage2/NQPHLL.pir:10227) (gen/parrot/stage2/NQPHLL.nqp:1082) called from Sub 'command_eval' pc 29765 (gen/parrot/stage2/NQPHLL.pir:11523) (gen/parrot/stage2/NQPHLL.nqp:1297) called from Sub 'command_eval' pc 355 (src/gen/perl6-compiler.pir:186) (src/Perl6/Compiler.nqp:17) called from Sub 'command_line' pc 28643 (gen/parrot/stage2/NQPHLL.pir:11077) (gen/parrot/stage2/NQPHLL.nqp:1245) called from Sub 'MAIN' pc 350 (src/gen/perl6.pir:129) (gen/parrot/main.nqp:39) called from Sub 'mainline' pc 317 (src/gen/perl6.pir:111) (gen/parrot/main.nqp:31) called from Sub '' pc 1222 (src/gen/perl6.pir:438) (gen/parrot/main.nqp:55) Running scripts non-interactively still appears to work, and the MoarVM backend is not affected at all.
[perl6/specs] e83a75: Remove SEQ() fossil
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/perl6/specs Commit: e83a759a09acf8838cefd5b4b0e7a421fa1414e7 https://github.com/perl6/specs/commit/e83a759a09acf8838cefd5b4b0e7a421fa1414e7 Author: Elizabeth Mattijsen l...@dijkmat.nl Date: 2014-10-01 (Wed, 01 Oct 2014) Changed paths: M S02-bits.pod Log Message: --- Remove SEQ() fossil This appears to be an implementation specific rakudo thing nowadays
[perl6/specs] 66edfb: adding missing =over
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/perl6/specs Commit: 66edfbe68aef73cf34482e8f8a7508f51c3de087 https://github.com/perl6/specs/commit/66edfbe68aef73cf34482e8f8a7508f51c3de087 Author: L. Grondin grond...@yahoo.fr Date: 2014-10-01 (Wed, 01 Oct 2014) Changed paths: M S32-setting-library/IO.pod Log Message: --- adding missing =over
[perl #122839] Rakudo* 2014:08 panda doesn't see bundled modules
what is your panda --installed list?
[perl6/specs] b89831: fix minor syntax error
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/perl6/specs Commit: b89831bcc08db79b28a430a5a5f334a286ff735e https://github.com/perl6/specs/commit/b89831bcc08db79b28a430a5a5f334a286ff735e Author: L. Grondin grond...@yahoo.fr Date: 2014-10-01 (Wed, 01 Oct 2014) Changed paths: M S32-setting-library/IO.pod Log Message: --- fix minor syntax error
[perl6/specs] aadf05: Make anonymous variables silent in all contexts
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/perl6/specs Commit: aadf0589905c9d76488fd81f738201d12f6d9eeb https://github.com/perl6/specs/commit/aadf0589905c9d76488fd81f738201d12f6d9eeb Author: Elizabeth Mattijsen l...@dijkmat.nl Date: 2014-10-01 (Wed, 01 Oct 2014) Changed paths: M S02-bits.pod Log Message: --- Make anonymous variables silent in all contexts If you're actually specifying something like ($a, $, $b) in your code, you expect the 2nd value to drop on the floor. So why warn about that at all? Assuming that's what will result in the message: means.
[perl #122882] [BUG] Symmetric set difference (^) doesn't right-associate or chain in Rakudo
Added tests in roast/S03-operators/set.t, marking ticket resolved. Pm
Re: state and = vs :=
On 01 Oct 2014, at 07:48, Father Chrysostomos spr...@cpan.org wrote: Does ‘state’ govern ‘:=’ the way it governs ‘=’? In other words, just as this: state $x = 1; only assigns to $x once (per closure), does the same apply to this? state $x := $y; I can’t find anything in the specs that implies that it does. The reason I ask is that I am currently implementing binding for Perl 5, but the syntax is different— \$x = \$y; (The reason for the different syntax is that, when we tried to use :=, we could not find a coherent way to handle edge cases [e.g., flattening vs not flattening]. Reusing existing Perl 5 syntax seemed the most straightforward and intuitive approach.) —and I am debating whether \state $x = \$y should bind only once or every time the surrounding code is executed. I could argue it either way (though I am leaning toward the latter), so I thought to find out what Perl 6 does. It would seem that binding state variables will be something that will be prohibited in Perl 6, until such time we find a good use case for it. [15:55:36] lizmat well, all of this was because of a question of Father Chrysostomos (a very productive p5p contributor) on p6l [15:57:01] jnthn OK. Well, I'll leave it at, I'm happy enough with the current semantics, so unless TimToady++ feels they have to chnage, then I'm not inclined to do much about the status quo. [15:57:44] jnthn (Where by the current semantics I mean, what Moar does, and I'm about certain what we do on JVM. I don't actually know how things are on Parrot.) [15:57:59] lizmat eh, but the current semantics silently do the wrong thing, no ? [15:59:11] jnthn lizmat: Depends how you define the semantics of state. [15:59:44] jnthn lizmat: Note that if you go binding a temp or let var you are in equal trouble. [16:00:03] moritzwouldn't mind compile-time disallowing rebinding temp/let/state vars [16:00:05] jnthn 'cus those are certainly about value, not container [16:00:14] lizmat moritz +1 [16:00:18] jnthn I took state to be wanting the same semantics [16:00:31] jnthn Yeah, I could go with a conservative approach of just disallow it [16:00:53] lizmat I'll answer FC Hope this answer your question, Liz
Re: state and = vs :=
On 10/2/2014 16:03, Elizabeth Mattijsen wrote:
On 01 Oct 2014, at 07:48, Father Chrysostomos spr...@cpan.org wrote:
Does ‘state’ govern ‘:=’ the way it governs ‘=’? In other words, just as this:
state $x = 1;
only assigns to $x once (per closure), does the same apply to this?
state $x := $y;
I can’t find anything in the specs that implies that it does.
The reason I ask is that I am currently implementing binding for Perl 5, but
the syntax is different—
\$x = \$y;
(The reason for the different syntax is that, when we tried to use :=, we could
not find a coherent way to handle edge cases [e.g., flattening vs not
flattening]. Reusing existing Perl 5 syntax seemed the most straightforward
and intuitive approach.)
—and I am debating whether \state $x = \$y should bind only once or every time
the surrounding code is executed. I could argue it either way (though I am
leaning toward the latter), so I thought to find out what Perl 6 does.
It would seem that binding state variables will be something that will be
prohibited in Perl 6, until such time we find a good use case for it.
[15:55:36] lizmatwell, all of this was because of a question of
Father Chrysostomos (a very productive p5p contributor) on p6l
[15:57:01] jnthn OK. Well, I'll leave it at, I'm happy enough with
the current semantics, so unless TimToady++ feels they have to chnage, then I'm not
inclined to do much about the status quo.
[15:57:44] jnthn (Where by the current semantics I mean, what Moar
does, and I'm about certain what we do on JVM. I don't actually know how things are on Parrot.)
[15:57:59] lizmateh, but the current semantics silently do the wrong
thing, no ?
[15:59:11] jnthn lizmat: Depends how you define the semantics of
state.
[15:59:44] jnthn lizmat: Note that if you go binding a temp or let
var you are in equal trouble.
[16:00:03] moritzwouldn't mind compile-time disallowing rebinding
temp/let/state vars
[16:00:05] jnthn 'cus those are certainly about value, not container
[16:00:14] lizmat moritz +1
[16:00:18] jnthn I took state to be wanting the same semantics
[16:00:31] jnthn Yeah, I could go with a conservative approach of just
disallow it
[16:00:53] lizmatI'll answer FC
To expand a little, all of state/temp/let are implemented under the
assumption that you'll be doing assignment to the container you applied
them to. That is, when I:
temp $x;
Then I'm really saying stash away a pair (the-cont = $x, current-value
= the value in $x), and at block LEAVE time then do the-cont =
old-value. It's the same container throughout, and if you re-bind $x
then temp has no clue about it. For state, containers are created at
first entry to a given closure clone, stashed away in the closure's code
object, and those same containers are used in the frames (specifically,
lexical storage) of future invocations of the same closure.
Generally in Perl 6, binding is a quite low-level operation. An operation:
$x := $y;
Might be JITted to just a couple of instructions (perhaps even if $x has
a static type constraint that needs checking, since type specialization
might prove the check isn't needed). Binding can be understood as
directly replacing the contents of a slot (that is, just setting a
pointer), and has no effect on any container that used to be there.
Since state is implemented by keeping another reference to the container
in the closure's code object, re-binding a state variable in a call
frame will have no effect beyond the lifetime of that frame:
sub foo() { state $x = 42; say $x++; $x := 99; say $x; }; foo()
for ^5
42
99
43
99
44
99
45
99
46
99
It's also worth noting that:
state $x = 42;
And a later:
$x = 42;
Are parsed rather differently. The same goes for := and ::=. The former
kind of construct is parsed as a declarator with an initializer; the
latter is parsed as the familiar infix operators. Curiously, since we
figure out what to do by declarator scope (so a different code-path for
state than my), it turns out that := and ::= initializers on a state var
are completely ignored at present.
I suspect instead of ignoring them, we'll go down to line of giving an
error on:
state $x := something;
...because it's hard to imagine it being anything except programmer
error. That is, unless Larry comes along and declares that state should
have got save what's in the lexpad back to the per-closure storage at
scope exit semantics, in which case it would do something arguably
useful...and increase the cost of state vars, frustrate inlining (in a
perhaps fixable way), and make something once immutable become
mutable...you might imagine I'm hoping we don't go this way. :-)
But to answer the original question, if we *do* end up doing something
that runs code in a state $x := ... rather than complain about it,
[perl #122842] segfault with moar with specific PERL6LIB and running a specific test file
This was fixed in MoarVM today (cmp. http://irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6/2014-10-02#i_9446636 and http://irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6/2014-10-02#i_9447562).
