M
To: Bob Rogers
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; perl6-internals@perl.org
Subject: Re: [perl #43269] [BUG] setline is tied to PIR source
On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 09:40:23PM -0500, Bob Rogers wrote:
>From: "Patrick R. Michaud via RT"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 2
On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 09:40:23PM -0500, Bob Rogers wrote:
>From: "Patrick R. Michaud via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 22:29:35 -0800
>
>On Wed Jun 20 16:23:40 2007, pmichaud wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 12:08:33AM +0100, Jonathan Worthington wrote:
>>
From: "Patrick R. Michaud via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 22:29:35 -0800
On Wed Jun 20 16:23:40 2007, pmichaud wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 12:08:33AM +0100, Jonathan Worthington wrote:
> >
> > Currently HLL debug info stuff is spec'd, but not implemented.
On Wed Jun 20 16:23:40 2007, pmichaud wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 12:08:33AM +0100, Jonathan Worthington wrote:
> > Patrick R.Michaud (via RT) wrote:
> > >The 'setline' opcode doesn't do what I expect it to do, which
> > >is to associa
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 12:08:33AM +0100, Jonathan Worthington wrote:
> Patrick R.Michaud (via RT) wrote:
> >The 'setline' opcode doesn't do what I expect it to do, which
> >is to associate runtime errors with lines in HLL source.
>
> Currently HLL debug info
Patrick R.Michaud (via RT) wrote:
The 'setline' opcode doesn't do what I expect it to do, which
is to associate runtime errors with lines in HLL source.
Currently HLL debug info stuff is spec'd, but not implemented. Well, OK,
the storage of it in bytecode is spec'd,
# New Ticket Created by Patrick R. Michaud
# Please include the string: [perl #43269]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=43269 >
The 'setline' opcode doesn't do what I expect it to do, whi
David Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> IMCC appears to choke on comments after "setline", especially if they
> contain digits.
Thanks for reporting that - and sorry for the late answer.
I've fixed the lexer.
> David
leo
--
Leopold Toetsch <[EMA
Hi,
IMCC appears to choke on comments after "setline", especially if they
contain digits. Is the lexer expecting /setline +[0-9]+\s*$/ ? Should
this be fixed? It appears to break pirate, which puts comments on every
line.
Michal Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry, I've been following this list
> with one eye tied behind my back...
> What happened to setline? Should I
> emit something else instead?
Both C and C are parsed and swallowed in the lexer.
The data will finally end in a
At 7:48 PM -0400 9/25/03, Michal Wallace wrote:
Sorry, I've been following this list
with one eye tied behind my back...
What happened to setline? Should I
emit something else instead?
It's never really been the right thing to do, but we've not got the
alternative, line metadata
Sorry, I've been following this list
with one eye tied behind my back...
What happened to setline? Should I
emit something else instead?
Sincerely,
Michal J Wallace
Sabren Enterprises, Inc.
-
contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
hosting: http://www.cornerhos
ob offset => line number
>mapping. Are .pyc the same?
Nope. Lots of SETLINE opcodes
Dan
--"it's like this"---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dan Sugalski sent the following bits through the ether:
> We should come up with an alternative for the bytecode files that
> has the line number info out of band.
This is what Java bytecode does. It has an oob offset => line number
mapping. Are .pyc the same?
Leon
--
Leon Brocard.
At 12:36 AM 12/20/2001 +, Simon Cozens wrote:
>On Wed, Dec 19, 2001 at 11:38:39PM +, Alex Gough wrote:
> > We're clearly doing this wrong, is it really worth calling
> > setline every time we *run* the line in question
>
>We call setline whenever the code gener
On Wed, Dec 19, 2001 at 11:38:39PM +, Alex Gough wrote:
> We're clearly doing this wrong, is it really worth calling
> setline every time we *run* the line in question
We call setline whenever the code generated by the compiler tells us
to. If it's so dumb that it calls setli
We're clearly doing this wrong, is it really worth calling
setline every time we *run* the line in question, surely this is
better supported through some sort of bytecode position -> line number
mapping which is created at compile time, essentially a part of the
bytecode format, rather
17 matches
Mail list logo
