Bryan C. Warnock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I count 86 violations of 8.3 in the tree. 8.3-friendly doesn't appear to be
a concern.
The files themselves don't have to be 8.3; however, they should be unique in
lc( substr($base,0,8) . '.' . substr($suffix,0,3) )
Under that rule, I make
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 11:57:25AM +, Dave Mitchell wrote:
duplicate: ./include/parrot/register.h - ./include/parrot/register_funcs.h
This should be regfuncs.h
duplicate: ./languages/miniperl/Miniperl - ./languages/miniperl/miniperlc
Urgh. mpc?
duplicate: ./t/op/pmc_perlarray.t -
Simon Cozens wrote in perl.perl6.internals:
Similarly, I'd like Parrot/ to move to lib/
And Test/, while you're at it.
But doesn't this require much CVS hackery to keep the revision history?
Don't be the slave of your tools ;-)
--
Rafael Garcia-Suarez
At 4:25 PM + 1/28/02, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
Simon Cozens wrote in perl.perl6.internals:
Similarly, I'd like Parrot/ to move to lib/
And Test/, while you're at it.
But doesn't this require much CVS hackery to keep the revision history?
Don't be the slave of your tools ;-)
I'm
On Mon, 28 Jan 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 4:25 PM + 1/28/02, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
Simon Cozens wrote in perl.perl6.internals:
Similarly, I'd like Parrot/ to move to lib/
And Test/, while you're at it.
But doesn't this require much CVS hackery to keep the revision
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 10:04:43PM +, Jonathan Stowe wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jan 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 4:25 PM + 1/28/02, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
Simon Cozens wrote in perl.perl6.internals:
Similarly, I'd like Parrot/ to move to lib/
And Test/, while you're at it.
On Fri, 25 Jan 2002, Melvin Smith wrote:
Hm, the FAQ would be not linked from either of dev.perl.org or
www.parrotcode.org. That's a bummer.
Ask, could we move this to dev.perl.org please?
Dare I suggest we check it into the repository and have a script
update the site from the
On Friday 25 January 2002 18:55, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 01:56:20PM -0500, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
If anything, it's largely our fault, for allowing, through our silence,
Simon to speak on our behalf in those situations.
Hey, if my speaking on behalf of Perl 6 is such a
At 4:55 PM -0500 1/25/02, Andy Dougherty wrote:
Sounds like a good plan. Perhaps something like the following patch is in
order then, more as a reminder for the future than anything actually
useful for now? (Note the changed file names: parrot/parrot_e*.h is
apparently redundant and definitely
One problem noted recently on the p5p list is that if you do
#include perl.h
in your program, it exposes a *lot* of CPP #defines to your program,
whether you want them or not. This is particularly a problem if you wish
to embed perl or use it with an extensive 3rd-party library.
For
On Fri, 25 Jan 2002, Andy Dougherty wrote:
One problem noted recently on the p5p list is that if you do
#include perl.h
in your program, it exposes a *lot* of CPP #defines to your program,
whether you want them or not. This is particularly a problem if you wish
to embed perl or use
To: Perl6 Internals
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
yette.edu cc:
Subject: CPP Namespace pollution
On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 10:30:01AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This requires the use of C++, rather than C.
See the FAQ.
--
The most effective debugging tool is still careful thought, coupled with
judiciously placed print statements. -Kernighan, 1978
: Re: CPP Namespace pollution
01/25/02 10:52
AM
See the FAQ.
This really isn't a very good answer for several reasons (I know the answer,
but that doesn't matter):
1. There is no link to the FAQ on the Perl6 page (that I could find
anyway).
(http://www.panix.com/~ziggy/parrot.html - I think this it)
2. See the FAQ for what? Not using
On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 11:15:15AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
See the FAQ.
Where would the FAQ be?
Hm, the FAQ would be not linked from either of dev.perl.org or
www.parrotcode.org. That's a bummer.
Thankfully, a quick google for Parrot FAQ (once you get past the avine
entries ;) gets
On Friday 25 January 2002 14:19, Wizard wrote:
See the FAQ.
This really isn't a very good answer for several reasons (I know the
answer, but that doesn't matter):
1. There is no link to the FAQ on the Perl6 page (that I could find
anyway).
(http://www.panix.com/~ziggy/parrot.html - I
At 10:14 AM -0500 1/25/02, Andy Dougherty wrote:
One problem noted recently on the p5p list is that if you do
#include perl.h
in your program, it exposes a *lot* of CPP #defines to your program,
whether you want them or not. This is particularly a problem if you wish
to embed perl or
At 11:19 AM -0800 1/25/02, Wizard wrote:
See the FAQ.
This really isn't a very good answer for several reasons (I know the answer,
but that doesn't matter):
1. There is no link to the FAQ on the Perl6 page (that I could find
anyway).
(http://www.panix.com/~ziggy/parrot.html - I think
On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 01:56:20PM -0500, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
[ rather interesting ramble about people, Perl, and personality ]
Someone needs to add this stuff to http://dev.perl.org/perl6/people
or perhaps start a Perl6-personality guidebook :-)
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL
At 1:56 PM -0500 1/25/02, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
Dan is cleverly aloof in is answers. There's not many folks who flippantly
hand-wave and still come across as knowing exactly what he's talking about.
I really do need to work on the flippant bit when I'm not in front of
a roomful of Lisp
I think the following would work.
* At the beginning of each parrot source code file there must be at
least two Parrot-specific defines, e.g.
#define PARROT_SOURCE
#define PARROT_SOURCE_REGEXEC_C
These would declare both being part of Parrot, and being
a particular file.
If some
On Fri, 25 Jan 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 10:14 AM -0500 1/25/02, Andy Dougherty wrote:
For parrot, we'd ideally like to make it a lot safer to
#include parrot/parrot.h
Nope--we'd ideally like to smack anyone writing non-core code that
does that. :)
Embedders will include
On Friday 25 January 2002 16:55, Andy Dougherty wrote:
Sounds like a good plan. Perhaps something like the following patch is in
order then, more as a reminder for the future than anything actually
useful for now? (Note the changed file names: parrot/parrot_e*.h is
apparently redundant and
:
01/25/2002 03:44 Subject: Re: Comm. Unity - (was Re:
CPP Namespace pollution)
PM
Melvin Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I also could care less about reinventing the wheel, if I get
to own my own wheel and put my name on it.. and paint it yellow...
No mate, you want to paint it purple. You know it makes sense.
--
Piers
It is a truth universally acknowledged that a
At 10:21 PM + 1/25/02, Piers Cawley wrote:
Melvin Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I also could care less about reinventing the wheel, if I get
to own my own wheel and put my name on it.. and paint it yellow...
No mate, you want to paint it purple. You know it makes sense.
Just as long
At 5:01 PM -0500 1/25/02, Melvin Smith wrote:
At 1:56 PM -0500 1/25/02, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
Dan is cleverly aloof in is answers. There's not many folks who
flippantly
hand-wave and still come across as knowing exactly what he's talking
about.
I really do need to work on the flippant bit
On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 01:56:20PM -0500, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
If anything, it's largely our fault, for allowing, through our silence,
Simon to speak on our behalf in those situations.
Hey, if my speaking on behalf of Perl 6 is such a problem, someone else is
very welcome to this
At 11:55 PM 1/25/2002 +, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 01:56:20PM -0500, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
If anything, it's largely our fault, for allowing, through our silence,
Simon to speak on our behalf in those situations.
Hey, if my speaking on behalf of Perl 6 is such a
30 matches
Mail list logo
