At 4:41 PM +0200 9/8/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
There are two simple answers here (the proposal for the change in
the way interpreter context structs are handled isn't it -- we'll
have the same problem because we'll still have backing stacks).
No. As layed out my scheme
At 5:34 PM +0200 9/8/04, Robert Schwebel wrote:
On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 11:23:36AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
No offense, but it *doesn't* *matter*. We're not using autoconf, as
the subject of this thread makes clear. That's not negotiable.
A really convincing argumentation.
It wasn't
served with The designer makes the final call, for better or
worse as a rule one.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
At 12:03 PM -0700 9/8/04, Gregory Keeney wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
The only problem I can forsee when doing cross-compilation is in
the building of the library files. Parrot itself... no big. We
build miniparrot for the platform you're on, then use the config
file to rebuild for the target
/ assembly/
forth/ postscript/ befunge/ intercal/ applescript/ whatever.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
them.
(Which can be problematic when cross-compiling, thought the tricks in
the archive are pretty nifty)
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears
about namespaces and stake out the ones we want. I'll do
that in the next message so we can keep the threads separate.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have
versioning
and such too.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
the actual underlying string
if we can, to avoid having to copy data. Hrm. Gotta think on how that
should look a bit.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have
At 11:27 AM +0200 9/3/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 12:16 PM +0200 8/31/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Pclass = getclass, Foo
Pobjnew = Pclass.__new(args) # Pnew is an OUT argument
and that be special-cased to call VTABLE_new according to calling
At 8:03 AM -0600 9/7/04, Luke Palmer wrote:
Dan Sugalski writes:
Time to nail this.
We need namespaces. Duh. We talked about this in the past.
So, here's what I'm proposing. It'll be formalized into a PDD once we
hash things out.
*) Namespaces are hierarchical
So we can have [foo; bar; baz
of non-perl6 compilers for parrot.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
and provided as
bytecode
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears
in the GC stats. Parrot was leaking one string header per
bytecode vtable method call. That adds up after a while...)
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have
:) the probing code
to do it ourselves, so we can be perl-free, at least from a
configuration standpoint.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears
At 2:44 PM + 9/3/04, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
According to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski):
*) extract substring
Rather than that, wouldn't you prefer to make substring of target
string the actual target of all these?
Only if the resulting substring'd be used in the match. Otherwise
you're
At 12:55 PM -0400 9/3/04, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
According to Dan Sugalski:
At 2:44 PM + 9/3/04, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
According to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski):
*) extract substring
Rather than that, wouldn't you prefer to make substring of target
string the actual target of all
At 8:24 PM -0700 9/1/04, Steve Fink wrote:
On Sep-01, Dan Sugalski wrote:
This is a list of the semantics that I see as needed for a regex
engine. When we have 'em, we'll map them to string ops, and may well
add in some special-case code for faster access.
*) extract substring
*) exact string
to it with
relish. (And a bit of catsup, with a side of cole slaw)
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy
big bytecode interpreter (parrot) will work
better than two smaller bytecode interpreters (which is what perl 5
w/the regex engine is, more or less)
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL
the limited utility of this is a point well taken too.
I think a simple:
rot[lr] dest, num_rotates, bits_to_rotate
with 0 in bits_to_rotate meaning all of them, and unrotated bits
getting masked to 0 is fine.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan
was hoping
this thread could help us kill. ;)
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
claimed to work and make the current situation less bad they
go in. Not a *great* policy, but...
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
, or even less cross-compile unfriendly, will
be greatly appreciated)
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
At 11:00 AM -0400 9/1/04, Aaron Sherman wrote:
On Sat, 2004-08-28 at 16:17, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Time to finish this one and ensconce the API into the embedding interface.
That reminds me, I was reading P6PE yesterday, and I came across a
scary bit on loading of shared libraries. The statement
of pain, and a lot of
harsh experience went into precursor designs, the current design, and
the current implementation.
We're going to leave it as-is.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski
that
Parrot_asctime_r gets is at least 26 characters isn't a new risk.
Without this patch, the latest version of parrot from CVS will not
compile on Solaris 8.
Applied, thanks
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski
this is the correct fix for this issue, but it fixes it
for me. If anyone has a suggestions for a better way to handle this,
let me know and I'll redo it.
Good enough -- applied, thanks!
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski
.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
At 9:56 AM +0200 8/31/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 4:09 PM +0200 8/30/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
The PIR
compiler needs compilation units. If the compiler is PASM, it'll compile
whatever is fed to it.
We can have an implied compilation unit if things are properly set
up. I
At 11:58 AM +0200 8/31/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rotates on bools are meaningless (nothing happens), ints rotate at 32
or 64 bits depending on the native word size
First: we don't have any rotate vtables or opcodes. Shall these be
considered as a TODO?
Yes
At 12:16 PM +0200 8/31/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Add a vtable slot to the PMC vtable inv_init (or something like that,
the name's not that big a deal),
vtable-new and __new?
Those are a little too similarly named. We should have something more
distinct
At 5:16 PM +0200 8/31/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
... The inability to compile and return truly anonymous subs in PIR
is, by itself, enough to warrant the change.
Ok. What about:
.sub @ANON
.end
Still runs into the issue of not returning a sub PMC to use.
I can see not wanting
of radio silence.
Applied, and thanks.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
is doable, certainly, but an
interesting challenge)
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy
versions of the expat library...) that it's already
loaded in.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
/embed.c:635
#23 0x0808468a in main (argc=1, argv=0xbbe8) at imcc/main.c:584
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy
At 1:43 PM -0700 8/26/04, Bernhard Schmalhofer (via RT) wrote:
This patch adds some test for the Undef PMC.
Apparently not -- the patch wasn't included...
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski
this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
At 3:32 PM +0200 8/27/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can trigger the problem locally, though not with the nci tests.
(And, indeed, it may not be the NCI tests ultimately at fault) The
core dump shows things dying in the dod run.
It's fixed. See answer to your
At 10:54 AM +0200 8/24/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, being clear here (I hope, though recent history suggests
otherwise) what I want is the API that the GC/DOD system presents to
the rest of the engine. This includes the functions you call to
trigger
At 9:06 PM -0500 8/25/04, Peter Behroozi wrote:
On Wed, 2004-08-25 at 13:03 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Okay, as has been suggested, the type order for numbers should go:
int-bignum-float
owing to the fact that floats are lossy and nasty. I'm not entirely
sure I agree, given that floats
At 10:56 AM -0400 8/26/04, John Siracusa wrote:
On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 07:48:03 +0200, Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John Siracusa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:46:53 -0400, Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The big question is whether being clever and producing
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
At 5:24 PM +0200 8/26/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ a slightly modified version of this proposal made it into CVS in the
meantime ]
At 10:54 AM +0200 8/24/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
DOD_WRITE_BARRIER(interp, aggregate, old_item, new_item)
For hash keys we
At 9:40 PM +0100 8/26/04, Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 04:11:52PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
is going to be an issue), and bignums rotate assuming they're binary
numbers some multiple of 8 bits (minimum 64 bits).
The some multiple being the next largest power of 256
At 10:43 PM +0100 8/26/04, Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 05:18:54PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Good question. The size of the bignum, if it's been declared to have
a maximum size, or the maximum size that it's been, though that
doesn't feel particularly right.
That feels
with an operation producing a type no tighter than the loosest type
in the operation. (so int/float gives a float, float-bignum gives a
bignum)
This seem reasonable?
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski
op). I think for right now we won't,
though we can revisit that later if it becomes necessary.
-Original Message-
From: Dan Sugalski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2004 8:39 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Tight typing by default?
It seems pretty clear
.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
At 6:04 PM +0200 8/25/04, Jerome Quelin wrote:
On Wednesday 25 August 2004 14:38, Dan Sugalski wrote:
For our purposes I think the typing should go:
platform int-float-bignum
No int64?
Nope, though you can build parrot with 64-bit native ints if you want
.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
there will be a massive amount of overlap. This could
be interesting... :)
On Wed, 25 Aug 2004, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Okay, here's the scoop. Ages ago, Clever People whipped up
mod_parrot, an apache module that embedded parrot. This was really
cool.
Alas, Parrot wasn't up to snuff at the time
At 12:03 PM +0200 8/24/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
cvsuser 04/08/23 13:24:37
Modified:build_tools build_nativecall.pl
Log:
Due to an amazing amount of ineffable evil in hash.c, build_nativecall
got redone to use a PerlHash and PMCs instead
At 11:05 AM +0200 8/24/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm up for some discussion on this one. I'm tempted to leave integer
binary ops integers,
I've already outlined that Python as well as Perl6 silently promote to
BigInt. I'd rather have Integer as the common
this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
, but it can't. Bignum's the thing
here, I think. Or either an int or bignum, depending on the size of
the result. (No bigints. It's all bignums. We may do bigrats, but I
doubt it)
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even
At 4:26 PM +0100 8/24/04, Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 10:49:37AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
As for rounding, I'm open to changes there too. Standard for
computing is round-to-zero, since it's easy (drop the fractional
part) but I was always taught round-to-closest-int. Too
wouldn't get NaN if $i is an integer,
though I expect everyone figured that one out. :)
-Original Message-
From: Dan Sugalski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2004 11:29 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Low-level math op behavior
Okay, since we're finally talking defined math
value
That seem reasonable?
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy
At 1:42 PM -0400 8/24/04, Butler, Gerald wrote:
Shouldn't 4 also have potential to produce BigInt?
Nope -- we don't have bigints. :)
-Original Message-
From: Dan Sugalski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2004 1:34 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Numeric semantics
At 2:08 PM -0400 8/24/04, Matt Fowles wrote:
From: Dan Sugalski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
10) The destination PMC is responsible for final conversion of the
inbound value
I know there has been a lot of grumbling in the past about the need to
create PMCs to be the LHS of operations. I
At 1:39 PM -0400 8/24/04, Simon Glover wrote:
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Dan Sugalski wrote:
6) Division of two ints produces a bignum
Surely it should only produce a bignum as a last resort. For instance,
shouldn't:
4 / 3
produce a float?
A float or a bignum, both are reasonable. There's
At 8:45 PM +0200 8/24/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 1:42 PM -0400 8/24/04, Butler, Gerald wrote:
Shouldn't 4 also have potential to produce BigInt?
Nope -- we don't have bigints. :)
Pardon, sir?
We've got the big number code, but I don't see much reason
At 8:56 PM +0200 8/24/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Okay, so:
4) Addition and subtraction of ints produces an int
???
Yeah, that was wrong. Later fixed. :)
5) Multiplication of two ints produces a bignum or an int, depending
on the result
Why
At 11:47 AM -0700 8/24/04, Sean O'Rourke wrote:
At Tue, 24 Aug 2004 13:33:45 -0400,
Dan Sugalski wrote:
6) Division of two ints produces a bignum
Where bignum means both bigger than 32-bit integer and rational
number? So
Yes.
4 / 2 == Bignum(2/1)
which doesn't get automatically downgraded
, for example, the returned
PMC wouldn't do anything since C doesn't allow you to have code
outside functions.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy
this flag for denoting iterator access for hashes.
I'd rather not. I can see this happening for specialized arrays and
slices, so lets leave it as is. If we need another flag, then we add
another flag.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski
, wouldn't the C compiler
want to return a sub that raised an exception?
Maybe, but then again you could be compiling a non-main C module so
that'd be OK.
Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 11:03 PM -0700 8/21/04, Steve Fink wrote:
I am experimenting with registering my own compiler for the regex
language
At 10:35 PM +0200 8/20/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
As part of the DOD/GC rework, we need to have a clean,
well-documented API for the garbage collector. Things were clean,
though not documented, for the original DOD and things have gotten
significantly messier since.
First
this is in the charset vtable, but
that might change later to allow locale overrides. (It'll be hidden
behind the string.c API at least, so that'll be transparent to
bytecode)
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski
this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
At 7:13 AM -0700 8/23/04, Mark A. Biggar wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 11:03 PM -0700 8/21/04, Steve Fink wrote:
I am experimenting with registering my own compiler for the regex
language, but the usage is confusing. It seems that the intention is
that compilers will return a code object that gets
!
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
At 4:00 PM +0200 8/22/04, Mattia Barbon wrote:
On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 19:36:43 -0400 Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 6:44 PM +0200 8/21/04, Mattia Barbon wrote:
Hello,
I think extenders should have access to at least some of the
flags in PObj_enum. Should we have a different function
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
for internal use, either by the DOD or the the PMC class
functions.
We should get the APIs better delineated, though, with the reasons
for this stuff being where it is.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
and is stable I'm easy here.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
);
print 0x2A
print \n
print 0X2A
on this line.
Leo, any reason to be case sensitive on this stuff you can think of?
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even
to have unexpectedly little
cruftiness. However I don't know about Win32 support.
Or support for other unices, or non-unix systems. :(
This'll have to be done manually, unfortunately.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan
vtables.
At some point I'll finally get to teaching string.c how to use the
new stuff rather than diving directly into ICU, and then we'll see
where we go from there.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even
At 10:12 AM -0400 8/20/04, Matt Fowles wrote:
Dan~
Just a few small questions about scons to clarify...
On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:16:24 -0400, Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Whatever we use is fine as long as:
a) We can edit the dependency file without having to know the
language the tool's
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
up reverting to prior CVS versions, and
there'll be mass grumbling. And we just don't want that. :)
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears
At 8:41 PM +0200 8/19/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
If span can generate PIR that'll run on a base parrot interpreter, ...
Currently custom opcodes and an all-in-one PMC, the object - IIRC. But ...
... I'd love to get some to check in as part of the test suite.
... that would
At 12:40 PM -0400 8/16/04, Dan Sugalski wrote:
I should [TODO] this, but I think it might get lost in the recent
blast 'o TODO items. (All of which I'd be thrilled if someone took
on. A big thanks to Will for diving into the queue and website and
getting things in a semblance of order
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
At 6:20 PM -0400 8/17/04, Aaron Sherman wrote:
On Tue, 2004-08-17 at 16:22, Felix Gallo wrote:
On Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 04:08:34PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
1) We're going to have MMD for functions soon
2) Function invocation and return continuation invocation's
essentially identical
3
At 11:33 AM -0400 8/18/04, Aaron Sherman wrote:
On Wed, 2004-08-18 at 10:06, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Yep, though the error dispatch case is definitely the easy one. Where
it gets fun is:
sub foo :come_from('bar', int) {
You've created an MMD come-from
Uh... that hurts.
Yes, but imagine
can see getting quantum and going for all of them at once,
though. That'd be really cool...
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
. And
documentation. That'd be good.
I should see if I can get a clear path through the network here
today, as it ought to be pretty straightforward to do.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED
, rather than a pure parrot interface, but there's nothing
saying what *you* call something has to match what *we* call
something :)
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED
. In this case there's no difference than if you have two or
more methods named, say, 'run', which do very different things.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED
, but expressive
enough to allow for reasonable control over restricted interpreters.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
At 7:30 PM +0100 8/17/04, Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 02:01:31PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Yep, per-interpreter means per-thread. Each thread gets an
interpreter. (Logically, at least. There'll only ever be one OS
thread in an interpreter at any one time, though I suppose
to a language to take advantage of this...
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
sexy, but definitely necessary. I'd certainly be
just fine with a macro or preprocessor solution, since I think we're
going to have to do this for every extension function...
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski
301 - 400 of 3756 matches
Mail list logo
