I submitted the patch below my sig way back in August 2002, in ticket
16622. It documented the then-current naming conventions for
structures. Is it still accurate and/or a good idea? Should it (or an
up-to-date version of it) be committed?
Yet another year has rolled by. Do you
On Sep 20, 2005, at 7:42, Joshua Hoblitt via RT wrote:
Is this still an unresolved design issue or can the bug be closed?
If in doubt just close such old [PATCH] tickets.
-J
Thx,
leo
On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 09:57:24PM -0700, Sean O'Rourke via RT wrote:
Joshua Hoblitt via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Since the rx_* ops are on the chopping block is there any objection to
closing this bug?
No objection from me. Actually, I'm not an active Parrot developer
now, and don't
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 12:33:38AM -0700, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
I submitted the patch below my sig way back in August 2002, in ticket
16622. It documented the then-current naming conventions for
structures. Is it still accurate and/or a good idea? Should it (or an
Hi Folks,
You may have noticed lots of RT traffic on very old and stale bugs.
What's going on is that I've foolishly volunteered to try to sweep out
and tidy up Parrot's bug tracker. Living in the tropics has taught me
the extreme importance of dealing with a bug problem before it gets out
of
On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 11:18:17PM -1000, Joshua Hoblitt wrote:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 12:33:38AM -0700, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
I submitted the patch below my sig way back in August 2002, in ticket
16622. It documented the then-current naming conventions for
structures. Is
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 11:00:58AM +0200, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
On Sep 20, 2005, at 7:42, Joshua Hoblitt via RT wrote:
Is this still an unresolved design issue or can the bug be closed?
If in doubt just close such old [PATCH] tickets.
I'm just trying to be thorough. Hopefully it
On Mon, 19 Sep 2005, Will Coleda wrote:
Good! [inline] isn't real Tcl, it's specific to partcl.
That test consists of the code:
inline PASM {
print ok\n
}
which should do the obvious thing. Odd that it's squawking about MMD_add.
It's very strange. It copied that snippet above
Hi,
The current format of the debug segment in Parrot packfiles (.pbc files), as
documented in doc/parrotbyte.pod, only allows for a single source file to be
named. This became insufficient some time ago since we had .include
directives; it also means that there's nothing sensible that
