Automated smoke report for patch Dec 2 20:00:02 2001 UTC
v0.02 on hpux - 11.00 using cc version B.11.11.02
O = OK
F = Failure(s), extended report at the bottom
? = still running or test results not (yet) available
Build failures during: - = unknown
c = Configure, m =
Automated smoke report for patch Dec 1 20:00:02 2001 UTC
v0.02 on hpux - 11.00 using cc version B.11.11.02
O = OK
F = Failure(s), extended report at the bottom
? = still running or test results not (yet) available
Build failures during: - = unknown
c = Configure, m =
On Sun, 2 Dec 2001, Brent Dax wrote:
It looks like $Config{gccversion} is empty unless we're using gcc.
However, I can't confirm this--I have access to one system using cl and
another system using gcc, and it's consistent across those two, but I
can't check others. Is it?
Yes. According
Why would a software machine closely emulating CISC architecture
be expected to execute as efficiently on RISC and CISC machines?
Does it make any sense to create a low-level machine modeled on
one-architecture instead of a high-level architecture which can
flexibly optimize to either
On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 08:31:00AM -0800, Terrence Brannon wrote:
Also, I thought Parrot was not stack-based If that is the case
then why does Overview.pod say this:
Registers will be stored in register frames, which can be pushed and
popped onto the register stack. For instance, a
Hey, all.
This is my fourth attempt at splitting out the platform dependincies
(now called features, to distinguish them from stupid bugs that
os-implementors put in to keep people from writing portable code (my, that
sounded bitter. Let it stand)). Untar
Is there some reason that a new pseudo-architecture has be
invented and compiled to? Why can't we simply compile to GCC's
RTL and allow gcc to compile to C?
And then just write a RTL-JVM and RTL-CRL converter?
Terrence Brannon:
# Why would a software machine closely emulating CISC architecture
# be expected to execute as efficiently on RISC and CISC machines?
We're not necessarily expecting it to run as efficiently. We're just
expecting it to run efficiently enough.
# Does it make any sense to
Terrence Brannon:
# Is there some reason that a new pseudo-architecture has be
# invented and compiled to? Why can't we simply compile to GCC's
# RTL and allow gcc to compile to C?
#
# And then just write a RTL-JVM and RTL-CRL converter?
What about people on, say, VMS machines, for whom GCC has
On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 09:12:09AM -0800, Terrence Brannon wrote:
Is there some reason that a new pseudo-architecture has be
invented and compiled to? Why can't we simply compile to GCC's
RTL and allow gcc to compile to C?
And then just write a RTL-JVM and RTL-CRL converter?
Oh my. Do
On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 10:31:54AM -0700, Nathan Torkington wrote:
I think it's time to collet these questions into a FAQ.
Agreed.
Any volunteers?
No way, but they can have the attached to play with.
--
Everything's working, try again in half an hour.-chorus.net tech
support
!DOCTYPE
At 08:31 AM 12/3/2001 -0800, Terrence Brannon wrote:
Why would a software machine closely emulating CISC architecture be
expected to execute as efficiently on RISC and CISC machines?
Because it means that the machine doesn't do that much work itself, passing
most of the work off to the opcode
At 09:12 AM 12/3/2001 -0800, Terrence Brannon wrote:
Is there some reason that a new pseudo-architecture has be invented and
compiled to? Why can't we simply compile to GCC's RTL and allow gcc to
compile to C?
Because there are platforms where GCC doesn't run.
Because GCC's licensing is
The string to number conversion stuff should really be done by the
string encodings... I think this is the right way to get this
happening, comments?
Alex Gough
Index: string.c
===
RCS file: /home/perlcvs/parrot/string.c,v
On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 05:42:15PM +, Alex Gough wrote:
The string to number conversion stuff should really be done by the
string encodings... I think this is the right way to get this
happening, comments?
Looks like the right way to me. Could you commit it?
I suppose this is the time to
On Monday 03 December 2001 12:31 pm, Nathan Torkington wrote:
Terrence Brannon writes:
And then just write a RTL-JVM and RTL-CRL converter?
I think it's time to collet these questions into a FAQ. Any volunteers?
Unless there's an objection, I'll take it.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL
At 01:20 PM 12/3/2001 -0500, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
On Monday 03 December 2001 12:31 pm, Nathan Torkington wrote:
Terrence Brannon writes:
And then just write a RTL-JVM and RTL-CRL converter?
I think it's time to collet these questions into a FAQ. Any volunteers?
Unless there's an
At 12:17 AM 12/3/2001 -0500, Jeff G wrote:
This is a *VERY* crude implementation of a very limited array in Parrot.
Hold off on this a bit. (Like for a few hours) I'll get the assembly-level
view of this off to the list in a little while, and the lower-level bits
after that.
(Thanks for doing
On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 01:20:42PM -0500, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
On Monday 03 December 2001 12:31 pm, Nathan Torkington wrote:
Terrence Brannon writes:
And then just write a RTL-JVM and RTL-CRL converter?
I think it's time to collet these questions into a FAQ. Any volunteers?
On Monday 03 December 2001 01:26 pm, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 01:20 PM 12/3/2001 -0500, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
On Monday 03 December 2001 12:31 pm, Nathan Torkington wrote:
Terrence Brannon writes:
And then just write a RTL-JVM and RTL-CRL converter?
I think it's time to collet
On Mon, 3 Dec 2001, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 05:42:15PM +, Alex Gough wrote:
The string to number conversion stuff should really be done by the
string encodings... I think this is the right way to get this
happening, comments?
Looks like the right way to me. Could
We're still very much on course for a release this week. I'm
happy with the state of PMCs and the state of the test coverage
for them - I'm OK with the fact that string-num is broken right
now because I expect a lot of work on strings in the next release
period. (Gotta get them encodings working,
While I'd like to use the current PMCs for Scheme atoms, they don't have the correct
behavior for use in Scheme. In any case, after I get finished with a reasonably clean
PerlArray implementation (hopefully this evening) I'll be developing SchemeAtom and
SchemeList types to support Scheme
At 12:01 PM 12/3/2001 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
While I'd like to use the current PMCs for Scheme atoms, they don't have
the correct behavior for use in Scheme.
What're they missing?
Dan
--it's like
Hurm.
I realized the other day that I hadn't done -anything- with tcl since my
last post, which has to have been months ago.
Given sufficient documentation, I could be motivated to improve the
status of this interpreter (and throw it into cvs somewhere).
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
While I'd
'Kay, here's the preliminary assembly-level docs for keys, which is how
we're going to be accessing entries in aggregates.
--Snip here---
=head2 Key operations
Keys are used to get access to individual elements of an aggregate
variable. This is done to allow for
Simon --
After I've done PerlUndef and the assembler patch, it would be hint
type=bigreally really great/hint if we had some interesting
examples using these PMCs; similarly, I'd like to know if the
maintainers of the little languages (Hey, Gregor, where did you
disappear to?)
I haven't
On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 03:11:04PM -0500, Gregor N. Purdy wrote:
I'm in M^3 (Major Marketing Mode) right now
Using emacs doesn't necessarily help matters.
I've been following the list, but I'm not clear on the status of
PerlIntArray PMCs. In/out, ready/hold-off?
Waiting for 0.0.4.
--
When
- Forwarded message from Simon Cozens via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Transaction: Ticket created by simon
Queue: parrot
Subject: pbc2c broken for non-core ops
Owner: Nobody
Requestors: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Status: new
Ticket URL:
Simon --
I'm in M^3 (Major Marketing Mode) right now
Using emacs doesn't necessarily help matters.
I'm a vi partisan myself. I'm intrigued by emacs, and I've even
tried it, but I just haven't been able to justify learning another
operating system when all I need is an editor :) Seriously,
Perhaps premature/immature question: How do I access command-line
arguments in Parrot? Should I try to create a new op or new ops?
-Hao
On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 03:44:22PM -0500, Gregor N. Purdy wrote:
If you think I'm missing the point/boat in some way, by all means slide
me a clue.
Hell no. The less work needs doing before 0.0.3 the better. :) Jako's
just fine, but as you're the language designer I wanted to make sure
you
On Mon, 3 Dec 2001, Tom Hughes wrote:
It's completely wrong I would have thought - the encoding layer
cannot know that a given code point is a digit so it can't possibly
do string to number conversion.
You need to use the encoding layer to fetch each character and
then the character set
Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At the same time as this was going on, considerable interest was
being generated in the programming community as a whole and in
the open source community in particular concerning Microsoft's
.NET architecture and Common Language
On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 09:56:50PM +0100, Norbert Bollow wrote:
Could you please mention the DotGNU project also? We're also building,
among other things, a C# compiler and CLR runtime.
I could do, but DotGNU is, as you say, doing other things as well.
We *aren't* doing what Mono is doing; we
Hao --
Perhaps premature/immature question: How do I access command-line
arguments in Parrot? Should I try to create a new op or new ops?
Last I knew, Dan wasn't ready for this. I committed some get/set ops
for the environment when the file open/close/read/write stuff went in,
but he removed
Simon --
If you think I'm missing the point/boat in some way, by all means slide
me a clue.
Hell no. The less work needs doing before 0.0.3 the better. :) Jako's
just fine, but as you're the language designer
Cool! I'm a language designer! :) Although, I'm not really sure Jako is
much
At 05:08 PM 12/3/2001 -0500, Gregor N. Purdy wrote:
Hao --
Perhaps premature/immature question: How do I access command-line
arguments in Parrot? Should I try to create a new op or new ops?
Last I knew, Dan wasn't ready for this. I committed some get/set ops
for the environment when the
At 05:35 PM 12/3/2001 -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
I think he wants to acommplish get/set env some other way.
Oh, right, env messing needs to be special for a few reasons:
*) Embedding
*) Threads
*) Various platform quirks. (And no I'm not even talking about VMS or
Windows...)
On Mon, 3 Dec 2001, Terrence Brannon wrote:
Is there some reason that a new pseudo-architecture has be
invented and compiled to? Why can't we simply compile to GCC's
RTL and allow gcc to compile to C?
allow gcc to compile to C? Huha? GCC does C-RTL and RTL-assembler
(of whatever machine),
On Mon, 3 Dec 2001, Dan Sugalski wrote:
*) Embedding
*) Threads
*) Various platform quirks. (And no I'm not even talking about VMS or
Windows...)
Acatualy, win32 seems fairly close to POSIX norms with the environment.
(Except that the names are case-insensitive (forced-uppercase,
At 06:11 PM 12/3/2001 -0500, James Mastros wrote:
On Mon, 3 Dec 2001, Dan Sugalski wrote:
*) Embedding
*) Threads
*) Various platform quirks. (And no I'm not even talking about VMS or
Windows...)
Acatualy, win32 seems fairly close to POSIX norms with the environment.
(Except that the
On Sun, 2 Dec 2001, Sam Tregar wrote:
On Sun, 2 Dec 2001, Michael L Maraist wrote:
On Sunday 02 December 2001 02:47 pm, Brent Dax wrote:
Perl5 just used a string as the generic c-struct handle as far as I know..
Well, generaly what I see is that when c-struct-like data (that is,
Oh, right, env messing needs to be special for a few reasons:
*) Embedding
*) Threads
*) Various platform quirks. (And no I'm not even talking about VMS or
Windows...)
And potentially CORBA/COM/DCOM/RPC/IPC? or is that Embedding?
Grant M.
At 06:58 PM 12/3/2001 -0800, Wizard wrote:
Oh, right, env messing needs to be special for a few reasons:
*) Embedding
*) Threads
*) Various platform quirks. (And no I'm not even talking about VMS or
Windows...)
And potentially CORBA/COM/DCOM/RPC/IPC? or is that Embedding?
It's a
On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 09:56:50PM +0100, Norbert Bollow wrote:
Could you please mention the DotGNU project also? We're also building,
among other things, a C# compiler and CLR runtime.
I could do, but DotGNU is, as you say, doing other things as well.
We *aren't* doing what Mono is
I'm getting tempted to have some sort of multi-level ENV thing that, for
most single-interpreter cases, collapses down to a plain getenv/putenv.
What about an RPC/IPC API that communicates (bi-directionally) with the
parent application if one exists, and if not, it runs inside a wrapper app
G'day all.
On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 01:27:33PM -0500, Adam Turoff wrote:
=head1 Parrot : A Cross-Language Virtual Machine Architecture
=head2 What is Parrot?
=head2 How does this relate to .NET?
=head2 How does this relate to Mono?
=head2 Why redesign a VM from
On Mon, 3 Dec 2001, Dan Sugalski wrote:
I'm getting tempted to have some sort of multi-level ENV thing that, for
most single-interpreter cases, collapses down to a plain getenv/putenv.
Umm, is everybody here somking crack?
I thought the point of %ENV was to deal with the environment, the OS's
At 10:12 PM 12/3/2001 -0500, James Mastros wrote:
On Mon, 3 Dec 2001, Dan Sugalski wrote:
I'm getting tempted to have some sort of multi-level ENV thing that, for
most single-interpreter cases, collapses down to a plain getenv/putenv.
Umm, is everybody here somking crack?
I thought the point
If anyone is interested in a non-IRC discussion system, there's something
I use called lily. Its main feature for this sort of thing is that it
does server-side logging of discussions and allows you to detach and
review what you've missed.
If anyone is interested, the URL to sign up is
At 21:44 on 12/03/2001 EST, Bryan C. Warnock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not to bypass the archival of email, but do we have an IRC channel for
real-time discussions?
Also:
irc.rhizomatic.net (or one of their myriad other servers)
#parrot
Alex Gough
On Mon, 3 Dec 2001, Dan Sugalski wrote:
I'm getting tempted to have some sort of multi-level ENV thing that, for
most single-interpreter cases, collapses down to a plain getenv/putenv.
On a related topic, I have a friend/coworker who's an avid developer of
PHP, and we routinely get into,
Something is fishy with tinderbox because of errors which appear on
tinderbox in the PMC tests but do not appear to exist (I can't reproduce
them on a fresh pull). Can those running tinderbox clients please add 'make
clean' to the build process and see if that helps? It may also be that the
54 matches
Mail list logo
