John Porter writes:
Aldo Calpini wrote:
this is a little tutorial about submitting patches
(should be added to a FAQ, or somewhere where it's handy
I think this deserves its own page somewhere on
dev.perl.org.
Seems like a good idea. I've added it to the queue. It'll end up on
On Wed, Jul 24, 2002 at 08:44:20AM -0700, Stephen Rawls wrote:
The last two (well, the only two :) patches I sent
were counted as spam. Some of the points were becuase
Sorry about that! I'm trying to be better safe than sorry in
preventing spam from getting to the list.
Do the patches
Okay, I finally give. For purposes of liveness tracing and GC, we're
going to unify PMCs and strings/buffers. This means we trace through
strings and buffers if the flags are right, and we need to add a GC
link pointer to strings/buffers. It'll make things a bit larger,
which I don't like,
Hi all,
I'm new to Parrot and Perl6. I hope this is an ok way to submit a patch.
---
- Allow assemble.pl to read from STDIN
- Use the '-' symbol to indicate STDIN
- Made invocation failures/usages behave more correctly
- Minor refactorings in this code section
Index: assemble.pl
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (=?Latin1?Q?Josef_h=F6=F6k?=) writes:
As im not that familiar with spamassasin maybe someone could help me
stop getting my mail tagged as spam when mailing patches..
Let [EMAIL PROTECTED] know about such thing and we'll take care of
it. Most likely it has been fixed by
On 1 Aug 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The mailing list archives are still not searchable (tell me about it),
but Brent Dax points out that the ever wonderful Google has the site:
keyword to do search restriction. I foresee a handy little autobookmark
appearing on my galeon
--- Melvin Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You can do this now:
../assemble.pl a.pasm | parrot -
*slaps head* Do'h. Thanks for the information, sorry
I missed it.
Stephen Rawls
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 11:44:00PM -0700, Robert Spier wrote:
On Wed, Jul 24, 2002 at 08:44:20AM -0700, Stephen Rawls wrote:
The last two (well, the only two :) patches I sent
were counted as spam. Some of the points were becuase
Sorry about that! I'm trying to be better safe than sorry
# New Ticket Created by Jarkko Hietaniemi
# Please include the string: [perl #15919]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=15919
This fixes [perl #15865] and [perl #15870]. I never saw this in p6i
(eaten
# New Ticket Created by Jarkko Hietaniemi
# Please include the string: [perl #15920]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=15920
This also never seemed to show up in p6i.
- Forwarded message from
Stephen Rawls wrote:
since I want the Tuple pmc to do the same thing in
this respect as the PerlArray pmc.
just my opinion, but I don't want this. it would be
PerlTuple then. let's keep this stuff at a higher level.
the only and one reason I see because one would implement
tuples instead of
# New Ticket Created by Jason Gloudon
# Please include the string: [perl #15922]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=15922
More Revisions of jit.doc as well as some more overview comments on the SPARC
On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 04:50:25PM +0200, Aldo Calpini wrote:
Mr. Nobody wrote:
The windows 9x command.com shell dosen't recognize
21 so it ends up passing 2 as an argument to the
compiler, which fails because there's no such file.
this is no news. you can't even build Perl on 9x.
--- Aldo Calpini [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
you should also consider the case TUPLE1 + 5 which
should return (a1 + 5, a2 + 5, ... , an + 5).
Agreed. I had started to implement this already, but
I've only done the add function so far, since I'm
still testing and waiting for a consensus.
what
take this little assembler program:
new P1, .PerlArray
set P1, 100
bsr GETLEN
set I0, P1[0]
print P1[0]=
print I0
print \n
bsr GETLEN
set I0, P1[1]
print P1[1]=
print I0
On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 11:22:56PM -0400, Melvin Smith wrote:
At 06:25 PM 7/31/2002 +0200, Jerome Vouillon wrote:
Closures
A subroutine must have access to the scratchpads of all the
englobing blocks. As the scratchpads are linked, it is sufficient
to add a pointer to the
On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 11:40:39AM -0600, Jonathan Sillito wrote:
So here is my take on a slightly simpler example:
sub foo {
my $x = 13;
return sub { print $x\n; };
}
$foo()
Melvin, I think it would really help if you could explain us how you
would compile this code.
# New Ticket Created by Josef Höök
# Please include the string: [perl #15923]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=15923
Pjuh after 2 month of work i'm finally finished with a first release.
This patch
Jerome Vouillon writes:
On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 11:22:56PM -0400, Melvin Smith wrote:
At 06:25 PM 7/31/2002 +0200, Jerome Vouillon wrote:
Closures
A subroutine must have access to the scratchpads of all the
englobing blocks. As the scratchpads are linked, it is sufficient
to add a
# New Ticket Created by Mr. Nobody
# Please include the string: [perl #15925]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=15925
The command.com shell in windows 9x dosen't recognize
21 so it messes up Configure
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Jerome Vouillon wrote:
On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 11:22:56PM -0400, Melvin Smith wrote:
We chose to implement
the access as ops, and you prefer using a PMC Array directly. I can
at least see one advantage to the explicit ops: they don't require
a register to use them in
At 2:41 AM -0700 8/1/02, Brian Ingerson wrote:
Hi all,
I'm new to Parrot and Perl6. I hope this is an ok way to submit a patch.
---
- Allow assemble.pl to read from STDIN
- Use the '-' symbol to indicate STDIN
- Made invocation failures/usages behave more correctly
- Minor refactorings in this
pdcawley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Bugger, I used Lquestionnaire|... and pod2text broke it.
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg10797.html
perlpodspec sez you can't use L...|... with a URL, and I'm guessing that
I just didn't look at that case when writing the parsing code in pod2text
because of that.
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Melvin Smith wrote:
Jerome Vouillon writes:
On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 11:22:56PM -0400, Melvin Smith wrote:
And they need to be COW, as closures have access to their
own copies of lexicals. I asked Jonathan to reuse the stack code
I had already written because it was
A bit of Parrot bloggage where I didn't expect it
http://lambda.weblogs.com/discuss/msgReader$3850
including evidence that the Python folks are not completely dormant:
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/python/python/nondist/sandbox/parrot/
/s
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002 11:22:26 -0700 (PDT) Sean O'Rourke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
A bit of Parrot bloggage where I didn't expect it
http://lambda.weblogs.com/discuss/msgReader$3850
I especially liked this part:
There is a tutorial at the main site and an O'Reilly book available.
The book, of
At 11:22 PM -0400 7/31/02, Melvin Smith wrote:
Conclusion
It seems to me that to implement lexical variables, we only need to
implement the set_pmc method and to extend the Sub class so that it
contains both a code pointer and a scratchpad.
I agree with you. It can be done without
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002 16:50:25 +0200 Aldo Calpini [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mr. Nobody wrote:
The windows 9x command.com shell dosen't recognize
21 so it ends up passing 2 as an argument to the
compiler, which fails because there's no such file.
this is no news. you can't even build Perl
At 12:19 PM + 8/1/02, Jarkko Hietaniemi (via RT) wrote:
This fixes [perl #15865] and [perl #15870]. I never saw this in p6i
(eaten by hungry spamfilters?), and the RT does not like me for some
reason so I can't see whether it got filed under #15865.
Applied, thanks.
--
Sean O'Rourke wrote:
A bit of Parrot bloggage where I didn't expect it
http://lambda.weblogs.com/discuss/msgReader$3850
This includes a link to:
http://www.oreilly.com/parrot//
Which appears to be a leftover from the April Fool's joke. Except the
article doesn't seem to realize it's a
Will Coleda wrote:
Sean O'Rourke wrote:
A bit of Parrot bloggage where I didn't expect it
http://lambda.weblogs.com/discuss/msgReader$3850
This includes a link to:
http://www.oreilly.com/parrot//
Which appears to be a leftover from the April Fool's joke. Except the
article
On 1 Aug 2002, Jonathan Sillito wrote:
Looks good to me. Couple of quick things, when I applied the patch
locally, it indented the end bracket of the invoke op in core.ops which
breaks ops2c.pl.
That's a bug.
Also the patch removed the yield op from core.ops, was this
intentional? More
At 6:46 AM -0700 8/1/02, Stephen Rawls wrote:
In working on the Tuple pmc (almost done!) I've come
accross a small semantic problem. I suppose this
might be language level (and thus Larry's turf?), but
how should the VM handle negative indecis?
It should pass them on to the PMC directly, which
At 3:05 PM + 8/1/02, Jason Gloudon (via RT) wrote:
More Revisions of jit.doc as well as some more overview comments on the SPARC
jit approach. Also included is a change to the way interpreter functions are
invoked on x86. This uses the fact that the interpreter argument remains
unchanged on
At 5:28 PM +0200 8/1/02, Aldo Calpini wrote:
fetching an element out of bound changes the
length of the array. but should this really happen?
why does perlarray.pmc act like this:
Because that's the way Perl's arrays work. Joys of autovivification.
--
At 12:34 PM -0700 8/1/02, Sean O'Rourke wrote:
On 1 Aug 2002, Jonathan Sillito wrote:
sub it is dealing with. While I am thinking about it, would it make
sense to distinguish between a sub and a closure? A sub would be a
little more efficient in cases where a closure is not needed.
Duh. Here's a unified diff.
--
Jason
Index: docs/jit.pod
===
RCS file: /cvs/public/parrot/docs/jit.pod,v
retrieving revision 1.4
diff -u -r1.4 jit.pod
--- docs/jit.pod29 Jul 2002 21:13:38 - 1.4
+++ docs/jit.pod
At 3:48 PM -0400 8/1/02, Jason Gloudon wrote:
Duh. Here's a unified diff.
Thanks, it's in.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 03:42:19PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 5:28 PM +0200 8/1/02, Aldo Calpini wrote:
fetching an element out of bound changes the
length of the array. but should this really happen?
why does perlarray.pmc act like this:
Because that's the way Perl's arrays work. Joys
# New Ticket Created by Leopold Toetsch
# Please include the string: [perl #15927]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=15927
Hi
I'm not totally sure, if it's the correct way to go, but it works ;-)
I
At 9:04 PM +0100 8/1/02, Graham Barr wrote:
On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 03:42:19PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 5:28 PM +0200 8/1/02, Aldo Calpini wrote:
fetching an element out of bound changes the
length of the array. but should this really happen?
why does perlarray.pmc act like this:
At 7:59 PM + 8/1/02, Leopold Toetsch (via RT) wrote:
So patch seems ok, but propably needs more tests in t/pmc.
Applied. Could you come up with some tests?
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski
It should pass them on to the PMC directly, which
should then handle them properly.
Let me rephrase. How should the PerlArray pmc handle
negative indecis when the absolute value of the index
is greater than the size of the array. Here are some
examples:
#first set up an array
new P0, .Perl
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Stephen Rawls wrote:
It should pass them on to the PMC directly, which
should then handle them properly.
Let me rephrase. How should the PerlArray pmc handle
negative indecis when the absolute value of the index
is greater than the size of the array.
IMHO it would
On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 03:05:11PM +, Jason Gloudon wrote:
More Revisions of jit.doc as well as some more overview comments on the SPARC
jit approach. Also included is a change to the way interpreter functions are
invoked on x86. This uses the fact that the interpreter argument remains
Am I allowed to write ancillary functions I want the JIT to call in
assembler? I presume that the JIT needs to go fast, and I suspect that there
are some bits that are easier to write in assembler (eg rotates for figuring
out constants) than in C, for the same amount of eventual speed.
I guess
On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 02:11:27PM -0700, Stephen Rawls wrote:
It should pass them on to the PMC directly, which
should then handle them properly.
So, if ix -SELF-cache.int_val then the code tries
to use a negative value to access the array element in
the C code. This is obviously
--- Sean O'Rourke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let me rephrase. How should the PerlArray pmc
handle negative indecis when the absolute value of
the index is greater than the size of the array.
IMHO it would be most consistent with the way
autovivification of positive indices works to
At 2:32 PM -0700 8/1/02, Stephen Rawls wrote:
--- Sean O'Rourke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let me rephrase. How should the PerlArray pmc
handle negative indecis when the absolute value of
the index is greater than the size of the array.
IMHO it would be most consistent with the way
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote:
No, I don't think this is appropriate. The PerlArray class implements
Perl arrays, and should implement their semantics.
It implements Perl 6 arrays, though. If it's a useful semantic extension
(restrictions are another matter), I don't see why perl 5
--- Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
No, I don't think this is appropriate. The PerlArray
class implements
Perl arrays, and should implement their semantics.
Let me rephrase again :) What should the semantics
for Perl arrays be?
cheers,
Stephen Rawls
At 10:24 PM +0100 8/1/02, Graham Barr wrote:
On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 02:11:27PM -0700, Stephen Rawls wrote:
It should pass them on to the PMC directly, which
should then handle them properly.
So, if ix -SELF-cache.int_val then the code tries
to use a negative value to access the
At 9:42 PM +0100 8/1/02, Nicholas Clark wrote:
Am I allowed to write ancillary functions I want the JIT to call in
assembler? I presume that the JIT needs to go fast, and I suspect that there
are some bits that are easier to write in assembler (eg rotates for figuring
out constants) than in C,
At 2:54 PM -0700 8/1/02, Sean O'Rourke wrote:
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote:
No, I don't think this is appropriate. The PerlArray class implements
Perl arrays, and should implement their semantics.
It implements Perl 6 arrays, though. If it's a useful semantic extension
On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 05:42:12PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 10:24 PM +0100 8/1/02, Graham Barr wrote:
On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 02:11:27PM -0700, Stephen Rawls wrote:
It should pass them on to the PMC directly, which
should then handle them properly.
So, if ix
I can't off-hand see tests that would try to read in and execute
bytecode written all possible combinations of wordsize/byteorder?
--
$jhi++; # http://www.iki.fi/jhi/
# There is this special biologist word we use for 'stable'.
# It is 'dead'. -- Jack Cohen
# New Ticket Created by The RT System itself
# Please include the string: [perl #15929]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=15929
57 matches
Mail list logo
