On Wed, Oct 10, 2001 at 05:13:21PM -0700, Zach Lipton wrote:
> I was thinking about configure and was wondering why we have to keep
> everything all in one file. Why not create a config/ directory (or something
> like that) and have a set of .cm files (ConfigureModule) that do the actual
> work, u
At 06:10 PM 10/10/2001 -0700, Dave Storrs wrote:
>Any interest in using something less painful than Make for this? I was
>thinking of Cons, myself...built in Perl 5 (which we are already requiring
>you to have), and much more friendly than Make.
Don't forget that our requirement for perl 5 is ul
One more example... this time to calculate the maximum common divisor.
One more question... does jsr working? I can't use it...
And, finally... can anybody explain the argument to return?
Thanks.. Cheers
--
| Alberto Manuel Brandão Simões |
| [EMAIL PROTECTED
I'm working on a semi-spike implementation of this, I'll post it up here for
comment when I have it ready so I don't go too far down the wrong road.
On 10/11/01 5:03 AM, "Simon Cozens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2001 at 05:13:21PM -0700, Zach Lipton wrote:
>> I was thinking abo
At 02:41 PM 10/11/2001 +0100, Alberto Manuel Brandao Simoes wrote:
> One more example... this time to calculate the maximum common
> divisor.
>
> One more question... does jsr working? I can't use it...
Nope. Soon, though.
> And, finally... can anybody explain the argum
All --
I don't have time to go into all the details right now, but I am working
on unifying all the stuff that process through opcode_table,
basic_opcodes.ops, etc.
I'm writing some Parrot::* Perl modules for reading and processing the
files, and reworking how everything connects up.
I'm hoping
On Thu, 11 Oct 2001 09:59:56 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>At 06:10 PM 10/10/2001 -0700, Dave Storrs wrote:
>>Any interest in using something less painful than Make for this? I was
>>thinking of Cons, myself...built in Perl 5 (which we are already requiring
>>you to have), and much more friendly t
At 05:04 PM 10/11/2001 +0200, Bart Lateur wrote:
>On Thu, 11 Oct 2001 09:59:56 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>
> >At 06:10 PM 10/10/2001 -0700, Dave Storrs wrote:
> >>Any interest in using something less painful than Make for this? I was
> >>thinking of Cons, myself...built in Perl 5 (which we are a
On Monday 08 October 2001 12:09 pm, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> Supercedes the previous one.
Patch withdrawn.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Assignment, not comparison. (Plus formatted for coding standards)
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: strnative.c
===
RCS file: /home/perlcvs/parrot/strnative.c,v
retrieving revision 1.16
diff -u -r1.16 strnative.c
--- s
Here is a simple script (I hope it works) to grep instructions that
are not implemented.
Cheers
Alberto
--
| Alberto Manuel Brandão Simões |
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
| http://numexp.sourceforge.net |
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
$file2grep = "docs/parrot_assembly.pod";
$opcode
http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/kbuild/cml2-paper.html
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Bryan C. Warnock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Assignment, not comparison. (Plus formatted for coding standards)
Committed. The tests should really have caught this, so I'm going to
do some work on them to make them more comprehensive...
Tom
--
Tom Hug
| I'm OK requiring a C compiler and a build tool for a platform. It's a C
| compiler and perl 5 that I don't want to require. (Rather nasty
| bootstrapping issues there... :)
This makes things a lot harder. Suddenly we're
re-implementing make. (in C)
Speaking of re-implementing make, I just
At 12:18 PM 10/11/2001 -0700, Robert Spier wrote:
>| I'm OK requiring a C compiler and a build tool for a platform. It's a C
>| compiler and perl 5 that I don't want to require. (Rather nasty
>| bootstrapping issues there... :)
>
>This makes things a lot harder. Suddenly we're
>re-implementing m
Here it goes... another simple parrot example.
By the Way... jsr is not yet implemented? Or I didn't know how to use
it? Just can't we do:
jsr THERE
end
THERE:
And... what's the argument to return? I didn't understand...
Thanks
Alberto Simões
mdc.pasm
Descripti
Did we put a patch into parrot that lets you fetch the current PC and store
it in an integer register? I seem to recall someone did, but I can't find it.
Dan
--"it's like this"---
Dan Sugalski
On Thu, 11 Oct 2001, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> Did we put a patch into parrot that lets you fetch the current PC and store
> it in an integer register? I seem to recall someone did, but I can't find it.
That's the '@' thing I was talking about making a doc patch for. I then
realized that I didn't u
i just checked basic_opcodes.c but i can't see anything like that...
but i found something that confused me:
parrot_assembly.pod says:
jump tx:
Jump _to_ the address held in register x
branch tx
Branch forward or backward by the amount in register
x. (X may be e
Dan, Sam, All --
> > Did we put a patch into parrot that lets you fetch the current PC
and store
> > it in an integer register? I seem to recall someone did, but I can't find it.
>
> That's the '@' thing I was talking about making a doc patch for. I then
> realized that I didn't understand it w
It seems to me that we should look at cons before writing Yet Another Perl
Build System. (i haven't used it myself, so I don;'t know if it's good
or not). For reference: http://www.dsmit.com/cons/
--Josh
At 12:18 on 10/11/2001 PDT, Robert Spier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> | I'm OK req
I noticed that many of header files use the following format:
#if !defined(H_GUARD)
#define H_GUARD
Is this preferable to "#ifndef"? I always thought that the defined()
function was only for more complex tests. Additionally, the defined()
function may not be entirely portable (it might be missing
At 06:13 PM 10/11/2001 -0700, Wizard wrote:
>I noticed that many of header files use the following format:
>#if !defined(H_GUARD)
>Is this preferable to "#ifndef"?
I find it clearer to read.
> I always thought that the defined()
>function was only for more complex tests.
Doesn't really matter-
At 03:06 PM 10/11/2001 -0700, Josh Wilmes wrote:
>It seems to me that we should look at cons before writing Yet Another Perl
>Build System. (i haven't used it myself, so I don;'t know if it's good
>or not). For reference: http://www.dsmit.com/cons/
It's GPL, so we couldn't ship with it unless
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Tom Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Bryan C. Warnock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Assignment, not comparison. (Plus formatted for coding standards)
>
> Committed. The tests should really have caught this,
At 06:05 PM 10/11/2001 -0400, Gregor N. Purdy wrote:
>I'm guilty.
>
>I needed address arithmetic for Jako subroutine support. I also needed
>a quick and easy way to detect it in the .pasm file. I use the square
>brackes as a quotation device to make it easy to parse. Eventually
>we will need an as
I was playing with Parrot and wanted a basic random numbers implementation. Just in
case anyone else wants it too, here are the appropriate diffs and test file. It
seemed logical for rand to return a real number between 0 and 1 instead of having any
reliance on RAND_MAX. Any other ideas?
--
On Thu, 2001-10-11 at 19:49, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 06:05 PM 10/11/2001 -0400, Gregor N. Purdy wrote:
> >I'm guilty.
> >
> >I needed address arithmetic for Jako subroutine support. I also needed
> >a quick and easy way to detect it in the .pasm file. I use the square
> >brackes as a quotation de
At 08:25 PM 10/11/2001 -0500, Brian Wheeler wrote:
>Since we're passing guilt around, there's an equate of '*' which is the
>current PC...and I didn't document it. You can do
> set I1,*
>and it will set I1 to the current PC. It doesn't allow any math,
>though. I thought about hooking up
On Thu, 2001-10-11 at 20:49, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 08:25 PM 10/11/2001 -0500, Brian Wheeler wrote:
> >Since we're passing guilt around, there's an equate of '*' which is the
> >current PC...and I didn't document it. You can do
> > set I1,*
> >and it will set I1 to the current PC. It do
At 09:12 PM 10/11/2001 -0500, Brian Wheeler wrote:
>On Thu, 2001-10-11 at 20:49, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > At 08:25 PM 10/11/2001 -0500, Brian Wheeler wrote:
> > >Since we're passing guilt around, there's an equate of '*' which is the
> > >current PC...and I didn't document it. You can do
> > >
Argh, my mailer crashed as I sent this, so I don't know if it went out.
On Thu, 2001-10-11 at 21:23, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 09:12 PM 10/11/2001 -0500, Brian Wheeler wrote:
> >On Thu, 2001-10-11 at 20:49, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > > At 08:25 PM 10/11/2001 -0500, Brian Wheeler wrote:
> > > >Since
On 11 Oct 2001, Brian Wheeler wrote:
> On Thu, 2001-10-11 at 21:23, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > At 09:12 PM 10/11/2001 -0500, Brian Wheeler wrote:
> > >On Thu, 2001-10-11 at 20:49, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > > > At 08:25 PM 10/11/2001 -0500, Brian Wheeler wrote:
> > > > >Since we're passing guilt around
The attached patch addresses the non-printf related casting problems between
opcodes (which are currently doubling as PBC chunks in addition to just
being an opcode number) and INTVALs. Handles sizeof(opcode_t) <=>
sizeof(INTVAL). Includes a couple other casting fixes.
Casting between opcode
If floats are so non-portable, why do we have a constant table section for
them? Or is that temporary?
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
35 matches
Mail list logo
