Uri Guttman wrote:
DS == Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
off list
DS Ask has found us a spot for the paper Alan was speaking of.
DS http://dev.perl.org/perl6/talks/
very impressive paper. my recent proposal for a multi-queue malloc
system has some of the ideas of this but
All --
I've updated the simplified DO_OP patch to work with the latest out
of CVS.
Regards,
-- Gregor
_
/ perl -e 'srand(-2091643526); print chr rand 90 for (0..4)' \
Gregor N. Purdy
All --
Here's the actual patch...
I've updated the patch for the bytecode -- C compiler to work with
the latest code out of CVS. I've modified Makefile so that when you
build, it automatically assembles t/test1.pasm to t/test1.pbc, and
automatically runs the bytecode compiler pbcc to
All --
I've updated my mod patch to work with the latest CVS...
Regards,
--
_
/ perl -e 'srand(-2091643526); print chr rand 90 for (0..4)' \
Gregor N. Purdy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Focus
Holding steady since last report.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Simon --
What's an IV?
That was a slip of the keyboard. The C-based disassembler is (as is
now obvious) not ready for prime time. I've moved it to its own
sandbox (since it doesn't have anything to do with the doop patch
anyway).
Here's an updated patch:
Regards,
-- Gregor
Missed one of these.
Index: interpreter.c
===
RCS file: /home/perlcvs/parrot/interpreter.c,v
retrieving revision 1.21
diff -u -r1.21 interpreter.c
--- interpreter.c 2001/10/02 14:01:30 1.21
+++ interpreter.c
Linux/Athlon/gcc.
Why does changing this: (DO_OP loop partially inlined)
while (pc = code_start pc code_end *pc) {
do {
x = z-opcode_funcs; \
y = x[*w]; \
w = (y)(w,z); \
} while (0);
}
to
x = z-opcode_funcs;
while (pc = code_start pc code_end *pc) {
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 10:45:08AM -0400, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
while (pc = code_start pc code_end *pc) {
do {
x = z-opcode_funcs; \
y = x[*w]; \
w = (y)(w,z); \
} while (0);
}
to
x = z-opcode_funcs;
The optimizer should hoist the code out of
On Wednesday 03 October 2001 10:43 am, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 10:45:08AM -0400, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
while (pc = code_start pc code_end *pc) {
do {
x = z-opcode_funcs; \
y = x[*w]; \
w = (y)(w,z); \
} while (0);
}
to
Thanks! Applied.
-Original Message-
From: Bryan C. Warnock
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 10/3/2001 9:22 AM
Subject: [PATCH] opcode_t *
Missed one of these.
Index: interpreter.c
===
RCS file:
Linux/Athlon/gcc.
Why does changing this: (DO_OP loop partially inlined)
while (pc = code_start pc code_end *pc) {
do {
x = z-opcode_funcs; \
y = x[*w]; \
w = (y)(w,z); \
} while (0);
}
to
x = z-opcode_funcs;
while (pc = code_start pc code_end
Linux/Athlon/gcc.
Why does changing this: (DO_OP loop partially inlined)
while (pc = code_start pc code_end *pc) {
do {
x = z-opcode_funcs; \
y = x[*w]; \
w = (y)(w,z); \
} while (0);
}
to
x = z-opcode_funcs;
while (pc =
At 10:51 AM 10/3/2001 -0400, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
Is there anything that might alter an operation involving only constants
and/or the constant registers at a time other than compile time (ie, when
the opcode is generated.)?
For integer, string, and float constants (i.e. I, N, and S regs) no.
At 10:56 AM 10/3/2001 -0400, Michael Maraist wrote:
If you did you -O2 it shouldn't matter though, because the code would be
reordered either way.
Counting on gcc, or any compiler, to reorder in ways you expect is always a
dicey thing. :)
Just because things get reordered doesn't mean they get
On Wednesday 03 October 2001 10:57 am, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Having said that, if you're looking to add optimizations into the
assembler, you're probably OK, but I'm not sure it's worth the effort at
the moment.
Investigating what effect a non-duplicated, non-overridable set of opcodes
Cygwin is fine. Although I still have to change the makefile to get make
test to work right.
-Original Message-
From: Simon Cozens
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 10/3/2001 9:55 AM
Subject: Parrot 0.0.2
Any objections to a release today? How's Cygwin and Win32 looking?
--
I'm a person,
Here's the situation (as I understand it):
Parrot needs to stop emitting strings exclusively in English.
Parrot needs a standard file format for a string replacement db.
Parrot should only put strings to stderr (except when told to).
Parrot should be able to emit error IDs instead of strings.
Here is the patch to get make test to work on cygwin. There may be a better
way to do it. It is actually courtesy of someone else, but I'll have to go
look to see who (unless you speak up :)
It basically takes
test:
...do tests
and replaces it with
test: dummy
dummy:
...do tests
so
On Wednesday 03 October 2001 10:56 am, Michael Maraist wrote:
x = z-opcode_funcs;
while (pc = code_start pc code_end *pc) {
do {
y = x[*w]; \
w = (y)(w,z); \
} while (0);
}
slow it down by 6%?
Perhaps x is no long considered a register.
On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 03:55:55PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
Any objections to a release today? How's Cygwin and Win32 looking?
FWIW, I've just successfully built Parrot on Linux x86, Linux Sparc,
Linux IA64, Tru64, Linux Alpha, FreeBSD Alpha, and
On Wednesday 03 October 2001 11:44 am, Andy Dougherty wrote:
Finally, trying a 32-bit opcode_t and a 64-bit INTVAL, I get
Mixed sizes are completely hosed. But we need to decide how they should
behave before we start randomly applying bandaids.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 11:44:25AM -0400, Andy Dougherty wrote:
It's not a core platform, but Linux/Sparc (intvalsize=8) is still not
very happy:
OK; I'll have to check that out. The Sparc I have here has intvalsize=4
by default.
--
Contrariwise, continued Tweedledee, if it was so, it might
Chopn is broken for n 0, here a fix and tests.
Alex Gough
--
To have the reputation of possessing the most perfect
social tact, talk to every woman as if you loved her,
and to every man as if he bored you.
##
Index: string.c
At 11:02 AM 10/3/2001 -0400, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
On Wednesday 03 October 2001 10:57 am, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Having said that, if you're looking to add optimizations into the
assembler, you're probably OK, but I'm not sure it's worth the effort at
the moment.
Investigating what effect a
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 04:54:41PM +0100, Alex Gough wrote:
Chopn is broken for n 0, here a fix and tests.
Thanks, applied. (with a tiny style correction)
--
You're never alone with a news spool.
Hi Grant,
Just as a suggestion, i would use the PO format (already used by other tools
than gettext, like KDE) so we get for free all the catalog manager tools
(like Kbabel, which is very nice, by the way).
And maybe error codes output could be just another target language. So:
fprintf(stderr,
On Wed 03 Oct 2001 16:55, Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Any objections to a release today? How's Cygwin and Win32 looking?
HP-UX 11.00 w/ HP ANSI C
-DDEBUGGING -Ae -D_HPUX_SOURCE -I/pro/local/include -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE
-D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -I./include
l1:/pro/3gl/CPAN/parrot 112
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 05:52:19PM +0200, H. Merijn Brand wrote:
HP-UX 11.00 w/ HP ANSI C
-DDEBUGGING -Ae -D_HPUX_SOURCE -I/pro/local/include -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE
-D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -I./include
Thanks. Also:
$ uname -a
SunOS neptune 5.8 Generic_108528-10 sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-5_10
How
On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 11:44:25AM -0400, Andy Dougherty wrote:
It's not a core platform, but Linux/Sparc (intvalsize=8) is still not
very happy:
OK; I'll have to check that out. The Sparc I have here has intvalsize=4
by default.
Perhaps I'm too
Simon Cozens:
# Any objections to a release today? How's Cygwin and Win32 looking?
Win2K non-Cygwin is looking a little sick to its stomach:
Microsoft Windows 2000 [Version 5.00.2195]
(C) Copyright 1985-2000 Microsoft Corp.
C:\Brent\Visual Studio Projects\Perl 6\parrot\parrotpmake test
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 09:39:32AM -0700, Brent Dax wrote:
Win2K non-Cygwin is looking a little sick to its stomach:
Dammit. There had to be a show-stopper, didn't there?
--
The Blit is a nice terminal, but it runs emacs.
On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
FWIW, Linux/x86 long long/long double/long long has a few glitches.
That's a good test platform because sizeof(long double) is 12 there, while
sizeof(long long) is 8, but Parrot/Opcode.pm still seems to assume
$nvivsize =
Simon --
Any objections to a release today? How's Cygwin and Win32 looking?
I'm about to post a patch that fixes macros in the assembler, and
along the way adds label arithmetic, which allows t/basic.t to have
all tests enabled (and passing).
I'd like to have a working macro facility in the
OK, let's try and clear this up.
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 09:39:32AM -0700, Brent Dax wrote:
# got: 'Seem to have negative Nx
not ok
'
# expected: 'Seem to have negative Nx
Seem to have positive Nx after pop
'
Don't know what's going on here.
t/op/string.NOK 4#
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 12:53:40PM -0400, Gregor N. Purdy wrote:
I'd like to have a working macro facility in the assembler for 0.0.2,
please.
Don't worry, Windows being broken has bought you some time...
--
In space 'cat scream.au | tee /dev/null /dev/audio'...
- Ben, in the monastery.
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 05:51:14PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
# got: 'Seem to have negative Nx
not ok
# expected: 'Seem to have negative Nx
Seem to have positive Nx after pop
So pop_n is broken on Win32. Did you see any compiler warnings
in the stacks code?
--
perl -le
All --
I have fixed the macro facility in the assembler (there was a goof
in argument processing in expand_macro). I discovered this while
implementing label arithmetic for the assembler so all the tests
in t/basic.t could be enabled. It now works, and as an added
bonus, the net result is poor
Simon --
Don't worry, Windows being broken has bought you some time...
I don't really need time (since its done). But, I'll take this as
go ahead and commit it when you're ready (which is now).
Regards,
-- Gregor
_
/
Botheration, I forgot all about this. How's it coming on?
--
IBM:
It may be slow, but it's hard to use.
Simon Cozens:
# On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 05:51:14PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
# # got: 'Seem to have negative Nx
# not ok
# # expected: 'Seem to have negative Nx
# Seem to have positive Nx after pop
#
# So pop_n is broken on Win32. Did you see any compiler warnings
# in the
Fra: Simon Cozens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Botheration, I forgot all about this. How's it coming on?
I haven't had any tuits yet.
Has anybody involved the vms-perl list?
I forgot to include them in the original mail,
but someone migth have tuits enough to start it.
ducking
Does VMS have
At 07:47 PM 10/3/2001 +0200, Henrik Tougaard wrote:
Fra: Simon Cozens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Botheration, I forgot all about this. How's it coming on?
I haven't had any tuits yet.
Has anybody involved the vms-perl list?
I have, but everyone's tied up. As am I, unfortunately.
ducking
--Brent Dax
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Configure pumpking for Perl 6
They *will* pay for what they've done.
# -Original Message-
# From: Simon Cozens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
# Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 09:51
# To: Brent Dax
# Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# Subject: Re: Parrot 0.0.2
#
#
#
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 01:52:05PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
If we don't build on VMS it's not a show-stopper for 0.02.
I think it is. There's not much point having a core platforms
list if we selectively ignore it. :(
--
* DrForr digs around for a fresh IV drip bag and proceeds to hook up.
At 06:49 PM 10/3/2001 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 01:52:05PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
If we don't build on VMS it's not a show-stopper for 0.02.
I think it is. There's not much point having a core platforms
list if we selectively ignore it. :(
Well, like any other
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 01:55:39PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
If you want to wait, that's fine. I don't think I'm going to get untangled
for another day or three, though.
Waiting might also help to shake out whatever's wrong with Win2K. Maybe
it's just Brent's system being funny. (And I'd try
--- Brent Dax [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--Brent Dax
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Configure pumpking for Perl 6
They *will* pay for what they've done.
# -Original Message-
# From: Simon Cozens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
# Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 09:51
# To: Brent Dax
# Cc:
Simon Cozens sent the following bits through the ether:
No release today, folks. False alarm.
You know, I think I have a case for adding my Mandlebrot generator to
the test suite. 'Cos it coredumps on my PIII Linux laptop ;-) I have
no C debugging skills, but grab it from the bottom of
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 12:08:54PM -0700, Benjamin Stuhl wrote:
# got: 'failure
'
What no debugging print output?
--
We all agree on the necessity of compromise. We just can't agree on
when it's necessary to compromise.
-- Larry Wall
Leon Brocard sent the following bits through the ether:
It's all greek to me, Leon
The following bytecode:
0075 [01d4]: 0032 0008 000a 0008
gt_nc_ic N8, [nc:10], L2
is wrong. It shouldn't be [nc:10]. 10 is the numeric constant which
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 07:09:06PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 01:55:39PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
If you want to wait, that's fine. I don't think I'm going to get untangled
for another day or three, though.
Waiting might also help to shake out whatever's wrong
On Wed, 2001-10-03 at 14:43, Leon Brocard wrote:
Leon Brocard sent the following bits through the ether:
It's all greek to me, Leon
The following bytecode:
0075 [01d4]: 0032 0008 000a 0008
gt_nc_ic N8, [nc:10], L2
is wrong.
Michael G Schwern:
# On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 07:09:06PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
# On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 01:55:39PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
# If you want to wait, that's fine. I don't think I'm going
# to get untangled
# for another day or three, though.
#
# Waiting might also help
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Simon Cozens) writes:
Any objections to a release today? How's Cygwin and Win32 looking?
except that `make test` always just tells me tat `test' is up to date,
then both cygwin and darwin looks good.
- ask
--
ask bjoern hansen, http://ask.netcetera.dk/ !try; do();
Here's a patch to include a 'myconfig' script in the parrot distribution,
similar to the one in perl5's distribution. The output looks something
like:
Summary of my parrot configuration:
Platform where perl 5.007002 was built:
osname=linux, osvers=2.2.17, archname=sparc64-linux-64int
On Tue, 2001-10-02 at 08:23, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Is 'pi' a string to be looked up in a table at assemble time and
converted to an intrinsic constant table index
Yes. At some point the assembler needs to have a way to declare named
constants, we just haven't gotten there yet.
How about
57 matches
Mail list logo
