## +#if defined(WIN32)
## +program_code = malloc( file_stat.st_size );
## +#else
Also, since more than win32 is not going to have mmap, perhaps you could add
a Configure #define for HAS_MMAP or something like that. Then you could
test the cc compiler to check for mmap availability.
The README really doesn't have to mention Configure.pl because when you do
make test_prog it will run Configure.pl for you (at least it is supposed to
:)
-Original Message-
From: Will Coleda
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 9/15/2001 12:13 AM
Subject: Difficulties
The README doesn't
Gregor N. Purdy:
# With the appropriate modification to Makefile.in as well (diff
# attached)? I don't remember seeing anyone particularly upset by it.
# [[ UPDATE: REALLY ATTACHED THIS TIME ]]
The correct modification isn't in Makefile.in, it's in Configure.pl.
You'll want to change
Will Coleda:
# The README doesn't mention Configure.pl (minor doc patch follows), and
# Parrot::Opcode is requiring perl5.6, which makes my 5.5.3
# quite unhappy.
I think I sent in a patch to README to mention Configure.pl yesterday.
Let's see if I can find it...
# From: Brent Dax
Gibbs Tanton - tgibbs:
# ## +#if defined(WIN32)
# ## +program_code = malloc( file_stat.st_size );
# ## +#else
#
# Also, since more than win32 is not going to have mmap,
# perhaps you could add
# a Configure #define for HAS_MMAP or something like that.
# Then you could
# test the cc compiler
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 01:15:57AM -0700, Brent Dax wrote:
As for the 5.6 thing...I think we're supposed to support 5.005 and
above. Can you tell what Parrot::Opcode needs it for? (And if it's for
'our', I'm going to punch someone... :^) )
Er...I think it IS for our, actually. : I'm so
Damien Neil:
# On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 01:15:57AM -0700, Brent Dax wrote:
# As for the 5.6 thing...I think we're supposed to support 5.005 and
# above. Can you tell what Parrot::Opcode needs it for?
# (And if it's for
# 'our', I'm going to punch someone... :^) )
#
# Er...I think it IS for
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 01:52:26AM -0700, Brent Dax wrote:
use vars qw(%opcode $fingerprint);#or strict will throw a tantrum
Not necessary--the patch changes those variables to lexicals.
There wasn't any strong reason for them to be package vars.
- Damien
Simon Cozens sent the following bits through the ether:
If you don't know what Python's CodeObjects look like, I suggest
you go see it now.
I've been spendind a lot of time recently looking at the Java
classfile specification. Yes, they were trying to optimise for space,
but there are some
## +#if defined(WIN32)
## +program_code = malloc( file_stat.st_size );
## +#else
#Should we be using malloc, or are we supposed to use our own allocator?
#(I haven't been munging in the C, so I don't really know--it just looks
#a little suspicious.)
In memory.{h,c} there is a
Sky asked me if anyone had done any simple benchmarks comparing JVM
and PVM at this point. Now, I know we're still at an early stage and
haven't really looked at speed, but a trivial counting and simple
arithmetic benchmark:
piglet$ time java Bench
1.470u 0.080s 0:01.59 97.4% 0+0k 0+0io
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 01:44:25AM -0700, Brent Dax wrote:
We're getting lost in a maze of twisty little Configure versions, all
different. Can we get a freeze on changes to Configure and associated
files until we can get this sorted out?
You're the Configure pumpking. I'll only take changes
On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 11:45:36PM -0500, Gibbs Tanton - tgibbs wrote:
Sorry...forgot the tabs...this one should be right.
Thanks, applied.
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 12:16:55PM +0100, Leon Brocard wrote:
piglet$ time java Bench
1.470u 0.080s 0:01.59 97.4% 0+0k 0+0io 5784pf+0w
piglet$ time ./test_prog run.pbc
40.080u 0.030s 0:42.07 95.3% 0+0k 0+0io 137pf+0w
We're really 40 times slower than Blackdown? Shite. What're
we doing
Masatake E. Hori sent the following bits through the ether:
piglet$ time java Bench
1.470u 0.080s 0:01.59 97.4% 0+0k 0+0io 5784pf+0w
piglet$ time ./test_prog run.pbc
40.080u 0.030s 0:42.07 95.3%0+0k 0+0io 137pf+0w
Maybe you got a Just-In-Time compiler?
Oh, I hadn't realised
piglet$ time java Bench
1.470u 0.080s 0:01.59 97.4% 0+0k 0+0io 5784pf+0w
piglet$ time ./test_prog run.pbc
40.080u 0.030s 0:42.07 95.3% 0+0k 0+0io 137pf+0w
Maybe you got a Just-In-Time compiler?
I turned mine off and I got,
hamlet{193}: time java Bench
16.442u 0.093s 0:22.88 72.2%
--- Brent Dax [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gibbs Tanton - tgibbs:
# ## +#if defined(WIN32)
# ## +program_code = malloc( file_stat.st_size );
# ## +#else
#
# Also, since more than win32 is not going to have mmap,
# perhaps you could add
# a Configure #define for HAS_MMAP or something like
On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 04:42:21PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 03:10 PM 9/14/2001 -0500, Brian Wheeler wrote:
I've been thinking alot about the bytecode file format lately. Its
going to get really gross really fast when we start adding other
(optional) sections to the code.
So, with
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 04:14:16PM +0300, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 01:34:06AM -0700, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
So is there anything we can leverage from
http://ivm.sourceforge.net/
They use the word 'empower'. I think they lost the credibility game
right
On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 07:49:50PM -0400, Gregor N. Purdy wrote:
I'd like to suggest that the Parrot image we've seen associated with
Perl6 be
this: http://pettalk.zapp.com.au/images/Africangrey.jpg
Simon
WC == Will Coleda [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
WC The README doesn't mention Configure.pl (minor doc patch follows), and
WC Parrot::Opcode is requiring perl5.6, which makes my 5.5.3 quite unhappy.
i noticed both of those problems.
i found Opcode.pm has a use 5.6.0 and it uses our. i don't
BD == Brent Dax [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
BD use vars qw(%opcode $fingerprint);#or strict will throw a tantrum
so why didn't 'my' work. those are file globals from what i can tell. my
causes interpreter.c to blow up. use vars fixes it.
uri
--
Uri Guttman - [EMAIL
At 09:23 PM 9/15/2001 +0900, Masatake E. Hori wrote:
piglet$ time java Bench
1.470u 0.080s 0:01.59 97.4% 0+0k 0+0io 5784pf+0w
piglet$ time ./test_prog run.pbc
40.080u 0.030s 0:42.07 95.3% 0+0k 0+0io 137pf+0w
Maybe you got a Just-In-Time compiler?
I turned mine off and I got,
[just (Sat 11:15 EET) checked-out copy]
(After running Configure.pl) make test_prog halts at:
cc -std -fprm d -ieee -D_INTRINSICS -DLANGUAGE_C -I..-c -o interpreter.o
interpreter.c
cc: Error: interpreter.c, line 97: In this statement, end is not declared.
(undeclared)
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 04:17:34PM +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 06:11:35PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
What we're doing is making sure the common case, the bytecode on disk being
used by the platform that owns the drive, is as fast as possible. We're
also making
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 06:18:38PM +0300, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
do { foo [ 0 ] = end ; foo [ 1 ] = set_i_ic ; foo [ 2 ] = set_i ; foo [ 3 ] =
add_i ; foo [ 4 ] = sub_i ; foo [ 5 ] = mul_i ; foo [ 6 ] = div_i ; foo [ 7 ] = ...
Your op.h needs rebuilding. It builds fine on Tru64 here.
Well, I must have checked out at a bad moment since Linux+gcc 2.95.2
is not faring much better:
make test_prog|head
cc -fno-strict-aliasing -I/usr/local/include -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE
-D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -I..-c -o interpreter.o interpreter.c
interpreter.c: In function `make_interpreter':
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 04:35:49PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 06:18:38PM +0300, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
do { foo [ 0 ] = end ; foo [ 1 ] = set_i_ic ; foo [ 2 ] = set_i ; foo [ 3 ] =
add_i ; foo [ 4 ] = sub_i ; foo [ 5 ] = mul_i ; foo [ 6 ] = div_i ; foo [ 7 ] =
I haven't had any problem with my instead of use vars...can you send me the
test program that blows up?
-Original Message-
From: Uri Guttman
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 9/15/2001 8:57 AM
Subject: Re: Difficulties
BD == Brent Dax [EMAIL
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 06:44:38PM +0300, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 04:35:49PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 06:18:38PM +0300, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
do { foo [ 0 ] = end ; foo [ 1 ] = set_i_ic ; foo [ 2 ] = set_i ; foo [ 3 ]
= add_i ; foo
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 06:44:38PM +0300, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
The question is why was it wrong after a fresh checkout? (also in Linux)
No idea. Is make_op_header.pl run? Does op.h contain the #define's?
Another observation is that after 'rm op.h; make op.h' the thing
builds but with
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 04:44:47PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 06:44:38PM +0300, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
The question is why was it wrong after a fresh checkout? (also in Linux)
No idea. Is make_op_header.pl run? Does op.h contain the #define's?
I'll try a new
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 04:44:47PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 06:44:38PM +0300, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
The question is why was it wrong after a fresh checkout? (also in Linux)
No idea. Is make_op_header.pl run? Does op.h contain the #define's?
This is eerie-- I
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 04:44:47PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 06:44:38PM +0300, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
The question is why was it wrong after a fresh checkout? (also in Linux)
No idea. Is make_op_header.pl run? Does op.h contain the #define's?
Another
Don't have Blackdown installed but here are some timing and profiling
results (linux/x86, compiled with -pg, 'gprof test_prog' output,
remembering the caveat of profiling always skewing the measurements):
ugli:/tmp/jhi/parrot ; time ./test_prog j.pbc
r 119,14s u 119,14s s 0,00s 100% ./test_prog
Um... with the current setup, there IS no Makefile until you run
Configure.pl, so I really don't see how that's possible. =-)
Gibbs Tanton - tgibbs wrote:
The README really doesn't have to mention Configure.pl because when you do
make test_prog it will run Configure.pl for you (at least it
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 06:33:18PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 06:32:57PM +0100, Philip Kendall wrote:
I posted a couple of bodge fixes from this, but I haven't done much in
the past couple of days... do we want to use a 32 bit type for reading
in bytecode or convert
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 06:33:18PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
We also need to think about endianness. Urgh.
This is something I ought to seek consensus on. (And possibly a ruling from
Dan.)
Do we *expect* Parrot bytecode to be portable? My gut reaction would be to
say no, but I can see
All --
The labels autogenerated by the Jako compiler use uppercase characters
and underscores. This patch makes the opcode inference logic in the
assembler happy with that situation. It also prints out the qualified
opcode it inferred when it fails to find a matching opcode.
Regards,
--
Leon --
Sky asked me if anyone had done any simple benchmarks comparing JVM
and PVM at this point. Now, I know we're still at an early stage and
haven't really looked at speed, but a trivial counting and simple
arithmetic benchmark:
Here's an implementation of the code in Jako. I haven't
All --
If the assembler patch I submitted a little while ago goes in, I'll
commit these changes to the Jako compiler. They fix a bug in assignment
handling and add some more conditionals to while and if. Also it goes
back to using implicit opcodes in a few cases that were broken before
the
On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Philip Kendall wrote:
My personal view would be that the gains due to portable bytecode would
be outweighed by the amount of cruft we'd have to put into the
interpreter to get them. As Nicholas Clark and someone else who's name
I've forgotten[1] mentioned, there are
All --
In working to make Jako be able to handle while (i 0) as well as
while (i n), I added a bunch of integer and numerical comparison
ops. I also tinkered with the assembler's op inferencing to get it
to pick the ops I intended.
The attached patch also contains my label parsing fix to the
Simon --
I'd like to suggest that the Parrot image we've seen associated with
Perl6 be
this: http://pettalk.zapp.com.au/images/Africangrey.jpg
I also found this site: http://www.resonans.net/jako/
Regards,
-- Gregor
Rocco --
I'd like to suggest that the Parrot image we've seen associated with
Perl6 be
this: http://pettalk.zapp.com.au/images/Africangrey.jpg
I can't seem to find a picture of a Norwegian Blue anywhere.
Maybe that's because its an EX-parrot!
All --
In working to make Jako be able to handle while (i 0) as well as
while (i n), I added a bunch of integer and numerical comparison
ops. I also tinkered with the assembler's op inferencing to get it
to pick the ops I intended.
The attached patch also contains my label parsing fix
All --
If the assembler patch I submitted a little while ago goes in, I'll
commit these changes to the Jako compiler. They fix a bug in assignment
handling and add some more conditionals to while and if. Also it goes
back to using implicit opcodes in a few cases that were broken before
the
This time i've filtered out all the memory leak related data so all that
shows up are legitimate errors. (hopefully)
I have set up a cheesy script to update the following URL with the current output
of purify on the current CVS test_prog (test,test2,test3,euclid) every hour.
Since build_interp_starter.pl and assemble.pl need Digest::MD5, I tried to
get it via CPAN, but it requires a compilation, which requires perl.h. I'd
think that there must be somewhere I can get the MD5 binary, since the MD5
module would be of use to others besides perl developers. My Perl
Mattia Barbon:
# ## +#if defined(WIN32)
# ## +program_code = malloc( file_stat.st_size );
# ## +#else
#
# #Should we be using malloc, or are we supposed to use our
# own allocator?
# #(I haven't been munging in the C, so I don't really
# know--it just looks
# #a little suspicious.)
#
This set of patches just eliminates some casts, and some
foo in favor of (IMHO) clearer variable names.
I also removed the DO_OP macro as it seems unnecessary
for the current case, but perhaps I undervalue it?
==
---
On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Michael Fischer wrote:
This set of patches just eliminates some casts, and some
foo in favor of (IMHO) clearer variable names.
I also removed the DO_OP macro as it seems unnecessary
for the current case, but perhaps I undervalue it?
Yup. The point of that macro is so
Hoi,
Just not to lie.
Buggs
Index: little_languages/jakoc
===
RCS file: /home/perlcvs/parrot/little_languages/jakoc,v
retrieving revision 1.1
diff -u -3 -p -r1.1 jakoc
--- little_languages/jakoc 2001/09/15 20:58:05 1.1
Ok, I just updated every .c and .h file to include the new coding standard.
I also updated most of the .pl files to use Parrot_Interp instead of
Perl_Interp. Please refresh your copy of the files.
I will try to watch things as they go in and make coding standard changes
immediately from now on
It seems to me that this might eventually get out of hand...could there
possibly be some way to automate the generation of a family of opcodes? For
example:
MANUAL_OP_FAMILY eq_T1_T2 {
if( T1 == T2 ) {
RETURN(P3);
}
else {
RETURN(P4);
}
} OVER(i, ic, n, nc)
Note that I'm not
Robert Spier and I just had some fun.
Parrot for Apache. :-)
http://cvs.perl.org/cvsweb/mod_parrot/
It's really simplistic and doesn't actually work. As Robert just
told me, it'll be really ugly to get to actually send stuff back to
the browser until Parrot has some kind of real IO
Gibbs Tanton - tgibbs writes:
I will try to watch things as they go in and make coding standard
changes immediately from now on so we don't have such a massive
change.
Alternatively, pumpkings could refuse to apply patches that don't
conform. One or two goes around and people will learn to
Gibbs Tanton - tgibbs writes:
It seems to me that this might eventually get out of hand...could there
possibly be some way to automate the generation of a family of opcodes? For
example:
Hear hear, the same thing occurred to me. The way that there are
separate functions for each argument
On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Nathan Torkington wrote:
Gibbs Tanton - tgibbs writes:
It seems to me that this might eventually get out of hand...could there
possibly be some way to automate the generation of a family of opcodes? For
example:
Hear hear, the same thing occurred to me. The way
I've been offline for a few days and haven't caught up on email yet
(nor, most likely, will I ever), so I hope no one else has already
done this, but
Attached is a file, msv.tar.gz which contains a simple script and .pm
file (*) for editing the string vtable. It asks you for a bunch of
(As previously remarked, I'm trying to catch up from a few days offline,
so excuse me if this is OOD.)
On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, Ken Fox wrote:
The interpreter knows the internals of the stack structure and is
responsible for managing it. To change the stack implementation, we'll
have to
So is there anything we can leverage from
http://ivm.sourceforge.net/
--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
[EMAIL PROTECTED] URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/
Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See
62 matches
Mail list logo
