Hi all,
I'm new to Parrot and Perl6. I hope this is an ok way to submit a patch.
---
- Allow assemble.pl to read from STDIN
- Use the '-' symbol to indicate STDIN
- Made invocation failures/usages behave more correctly
- Minor refactorings in this code section
Index: assemble.pl
==
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (=?Latin1?Q?Josef_h=F6=F6k?=) writes:
> As im not that familiar with spamassasin maybe someone could help me
> stop getting my mail tagged as spam when mailing patches..
Let [EMAIL PROTECTED] know about such thing and we'll take care of
it. Most likely it has been fixed by Rob
On 1 Aug 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The mailing list archives are still not searchable (tell me about it),
> but Brent Dax points out that the ever wonderful Google has the "site:"
> keyword to do search restriction. I foresee a handy little autobookmark
> appearing on my gal
--- Melvin Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You can do this now:
>
> ../assemble.pl a.pasm | parrot -
*slaps head* Do'h. Thanks for the information, sorry
I missed it.
Stephen Rawls
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
ht
On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 11:44:00PM -0700, Robert Spier wrote:
> >On Wed, Jul 24, 2002 at 08:44:20AM -0700, Stephen Rawls wrote:
> >> The last two (well, the only two :) patches I sent
> >> were counted as spam. Some of the points were becuase
>
> Sorry about that! I'm trying to be better safe t
# New Ticket Created by Jarkko Hietaniemi
# Please include the string: [perl #15919]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=15919 >
This fixes [perl #15865] and [perl #15870]. I never saw this in p6i
(eaten by hun
# New Ticket Created by Jarkko Hietaniemi
# Please include the string: [perl #15920]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=15920 >
This also never seemed to show up in p6i.
- Forwarded message from Jarkko Hie
Stephen Rawls wrote:
> since I want the Tuple pmc to do the same thing in
> this respect as the PerlArray pmc.
just my opinion, but I don't want this. it would be
PerlTuple then. let's keep this stuff at a higher level.
the only and one reason I see because one would implement
tuples instead of
Mr. Nobody wrote:
> The windows 9x command.com shell dosen't recognize
> 2>&1 so it ends up passing "2" as an argument to the
> compiler, which fails because there's no such file.
this is no news. you can't even build Perl on 9x.
IMHO, *build* platform targets should not include 9x.
build it on N
--- Aldo Calpini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> there should also be no need to check for
> syntactic sugar like negative indices.
True, I suppose if a language REALLY wanted this, it
could be implemented on the interpreter level.
Also of note, instead of having TUPLE1 + TUPLE2 act as
arrays, and
# New Ticket Created by Jason Gloudon
# Please include the string: [perl #15922]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=15922 >
More Revisions of jit.doc as well as some more overview comments on the SPARC
jit app
On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 04:50:25PM +0200, Aldo Calpini wrote:
> Mr. Nobody wrote:
> > The windows 9x command.com shell dosen't recognize
> > 2>&1 so it ends up passing "2" as an argument to the
> > compiler, which fails because there's no such file.
>
> this is no news. you can't even build Perl
Stephen Rawls wrote:
> Also of note, instead of having TUPLE1 + TUPLE2 act as
> arrays, and return the sum of their sizes, I am
> treating it like this: (a1, a2, ... , an) + (b1, b2,
> ... , bn) = (a1 + b1, a2 + b2, ... , an + bn)
makes sense to me (and certainly adds some spice to
the cause of t
--- Aldo Calpini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> you should also consider the case TUPLE1 + 5 which
> should return (a1 + 5, a2 + 5, ... , an + 5).
Agreed. I had started to implement this already, but
I've only done the add function so far, since I'm
still testing and waiting for a consensus.
>
take this little assembler program:
new P1, .PerlArray
set P1, 100
bsr GETLEN
set I0, P1[0]
print "P1[0]="
print I0
print "\n"
bsr GETLEN
set I0, P1[1]
print "P1[1]="
print I0
On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 11:22:56PM -0400, Melvin Smith wrote:
> At 06:25 PM 7/31/2002 +0200, Jerome Vouillon wrote:
> >Closures
> >
> > A subroutine must have access to the scratchpads of all the
> > englobing blocks. As the scratchpads are linked, it is sufficient
> > to add a pointer to the
On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 11:40:39AM -0600, Jonathan Sillito wrote:
> So here is my take on a slightly simpler example:
>
> sub foo {
> my $x = 13;
> return sub { print "$x\n"; };
> }
>
> $foo()
Melvin, I think it would really help if you could explain us how you
would compile this
# New Ticket Created by Josef Höök
# Please include the string: [perl #15923]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=15923 >
Pjuh after 2 month of work i'm finally finished with a first release.
This patch adds ma
Jerome Vouillon writes:
>On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 11:22:56PM -0400, Melvin Smith wrote:
>> At 06:25 PM 7/31/2002 +0200, Jerome Vouillon wrote:
>> >Closures
>> >
>> > A subroutine must have access to the scratchpads of all the
>> > englobing blocks. As the scratchpads are linked, it is sufficient
# New Ticket Created by "Mr. Nobody"
# Please include the string: [perl #15925]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=15925 >
The command.com shell in windows 9x dosen't recognize
2>&1 so it messes up Configure wh
On 31 Jul 2002, Jonathan Sillito wrote:
> > > invoke# assumes sub is in P0
> > > # on invoke the sub pmc fixes the current
> > > # context to have the correct lexicals
> >
> > Can you elaborate on this? What is done precisely to fix the current
> > context?
>
>
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Jerome Vouillon wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 11:22:56PM -0400, Melvin Smith wrote:
> > We chose to implement
> > the access as ops, and you prefer using a PMC Array directly. I can
> > at least see one advantage to the explicit ops: they don't require
> > a register to use
At 2:41 AM -0700 8/1/02, Brian Ingerson wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>I'm new to Parrot and Perl6. I hope this is an ok way to submit a patch.
>
>---
>- Allow assemble.pl to read from STDIN
>- Use the '-' symbol to indicate STDIN
>- Made invocation failures/usages behave more correctly
>- Minor refactorings
pdcawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Bugger, I used L and pod2text broke it.
> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg10797.html
perlpodspec sez you can't use L<...|...> with a URL, and I'm guessing that
I just didn't look at that case when writing the parsing code in pod2text
because of that.
--
Russ Al
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Melvin Smith wrote:
> Jerome Vouillon writes:
> >On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 11:22:56PM -0400, Melvin Smith wrote:
> >> And they need to be COW, as closures have access to their
> >> own copies of lexicals. I asked Jonathan to reuse the stack code
> >> I had already written becau
A bit of Parrot bloggage where I didn't expect it
http://lambda.weblogs.com/discuss/msgReader$3850
including evidence that the Python folks are not completely dormant:
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/python/python/nondist/sandbox/parrot/
/s
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002 11:22:26 -0700 (PDT) Sean O'Rourke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> A bit of Parrot bloggage where I didn't expect it
> http://lambda.weblogs.com/discuss/msgReader$3850
I especially liked this part:
"There is a tutorial at the main site and an O'Reilly book available."
The book
At 11:22 PM -0400 7/31/02, Melvin Smith wrote:
>>Conclusion
>>
>> It seems to me that to implement lexical variables, we only need to
>> implement the set_pmc method and to extend the Sub class so that it
>> contains both a code pointer and a scratchpad.
>
>I agree with you. It can be done w
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002 16:50:25 +0200 Aldo Calpini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mr. Nobody wrote:
> > The windows 9x command.com shell dosen't recognize
> > 2>&1 so it ends up passing "2" as an argument to the
> > compiler, which fails because there's no such file.
>
> this is no news. you can't eve
At 12:19 PM + 8/1/02, Jarkko Hietaniemi (via RT) wrote:
>This fixes [perl #15865] and [perl #15870]. I never saw this in p6i
>(eaten by hungry spamfilters?), and the RT does not like me for some
>reason so I can't see whether it got filed under #15865.
Applied, thanks.
--
Sean O'Rourke wrote:
> A bit of Parrot bloggage where I didn't expect it
>
> http://lambda.weblogs.com/discuss/msgReader$3850
This includes a link to:
http://www.oreilly.com/parrot//
Which appears to be a leftover from the April Fool's joke. Except the
article doesn't seem to realize it's a j
Will Coleda wrote:
> Sean O'Rourke wrote:
>
>> A bit of Parrot bloggage where I didn't expect it
>>
>> http://lambda.weblogs.com/discuss/msgReader$3850
>
>
> This includes a link to:
>
> http://www.oreilly.com/parrot//
>
> Which appears to be a leftover from the April Fool's joke. Except the
On 1 Aug 2002, Jonathan Sillito wrote:
> Looks good to me. Couple of quick things, when I applied the patch
> locally, it indented the end bracket of the invoke op in core.ops which
> breaks ops2c.pl.
That's a bug.
> Also the patch removed the yield op from core.ops, was this
> intentional? Mor
At 12:20 PM + 8/1/02, Jarkko Hietaniemi (via RT) wrote:
>IRIX found another return missing from a non-void function.
Thanks, applied.
--
Dan
--"it's like this"---
Dan Sugalski
At 6:46 AM -0700 8/1/02, Stephen Rawls wrote:
>In working on the Tuple pmc (almost done!) I've come
>accross a small semantic problem. I suppose this
>might be language level (and thus Larry's turf?), but
>how should the VM handle negative indecis?
It should pass them on to the PMC directly, whi
At 3:05 PM + 8/1/02, Jason Gloudon (via RT) wrote:
>More Revisions of jit.doc as well as some more overview comments on the SPARC
>jit approach. Also included is a change to the way interpreter functions are
>invoked on x86. This uses the fact that the interpreter argument remains
>unchanged o
At 5:28 PM +0200 8/1/02, Aldo Calpini wrote:
>fetching an element out of bound changes the
>length of the array. but should this really happen?
>why does perlarray.pmc act like this:
Because that's the way Perl's arrays work. Joys of autovivification.
--
At 12:34 PM -0700 8/1/02, Sean O'Rourke wrote:
>On 1 Aug 2002, Jonathan Sillito wrote:
> > sub it is dealing with. While I am thinking about it, would it make
>> sense to distinguish between a sub and a closure? A sub would be a
>> little more efficient in cases where a closure is not needed.
>
Duh. Here's a unified diff.
--
Jason
Index: docs/jit.pod
===
RCS file: /cvs/public/parrot/docs/jit.pod,v
retrieving revision 1.4
diff -u -r1.4 jit.pod
--- docs/jit.pod29 Jul 2002 21:13:38 - 1.4
+++ docs/jit.pod
At 3:48 PM -0400 8/1/02, Jason Gloudon wrote:
>Duh. Here's a unified diff.
Thanks, it's in.
--
Dan
--"it's like this"---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 03:42:19PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 5:28 PM +0200 8/1/02, Aldo Calpini wrote:
> >fetching an element out of bound changes the
> >length of the array. but should this really happen?
> >why does perlarray.pmc act like this:
>
> Because that's the way Perl's arrays wor
# New Ticket Created by Leopold Toetsch
# Please include the string: [perl #15927]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=15927 >
Hi
I'm not totally sure, if it's the correct way to go, but it works ;-)
I did a t
At 9:04 PM +0100 8/1/02, Graham Barr wrote:
>On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 03:42:19PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>> At 5:28 PM +0200 8/1/02, Aldo Calpini wrote:
>> >fetching an element out of bound changes the
>> >length of the array. but should this really happen?
>> >why does perlarray.pmc act lik
At 7:59 PM + 8/1/02, Leopold Toetsch (via RT) wrote:
>So patch seems ok, but propably needs more tests in t/pmc.
Applied. Could you come up with some tests?
--
Dan
--"it's like this"---
Dan Sugalski
> It should pass them on to the PMC directly, which
> should then handle them properly.
Let me rephrase. How should the PerlArray pmc handle
negative indecis when the absolute value of the index
is greater than the size of the array. Here are some
examples:
#first set up an array
new P0, .Per
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Stephen Rawls wrote:
> > It should pass them on to the PMC directly, which
> > should then handle them properly.
>
> Let me rephrase. How should the PerlArray pmc handle
> negative indecis when the absolute value of the index
> is greater than the size of the array.
IMHO it
On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 03:05:11PM +, Jason Gloudon wrote:
> More Revisions of jit.doc as well as some more overview comments on the SPARC
> jit approach. Also included is a change to the way interpreter functions are
> invoked on x86. This uses the fact that the interpreter argument remains
>
Am I allowed to write ancillary functions I want the JIT to call in
assembler? I presume that the JIT needs to go fast, and I suspect that there
are some bits that are easier to write in assembler (eg rotates for figuring
out constants) than in C, for the same amount of eventual speed.
I guess it
On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 02:11:27PM -0700, Stephen Rawls wrote:
> > It should pass them on to the PMC directly, which
> > should then handle them properly.
>
> So, if ix < -SELF->cache.int_val then the code tries
> to use a negative value to access the array element in
> the C code. This is obvi
--- Sean O'Rourke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Let me rephrase. How should the PerlArray pmc
> > handle negative indecis when the absolute value of
> > the index is greater than the size of the array.
>
> IMHO it would be most consistent with the way
> autovivification of positive indices work
At 2:32 PM -0700 8/1/02, Stephen Rawls wrote:
>--- Sean O'Rourke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Let me rephrase. How should the PerlArray pmc
>> > handle negative indecis when the absolute value of
>> > the index is greater than the size of the array.
>>
>> IMHO it would be most consistent w
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> No, I don't think this is appropriate. The PerlArray class implements
> Perl arrays, and should implement their semantics.
It implements Perl 6 arrays, though. If it's a useful semantic extension
(restrictions are another matter), I don't see why "perl 5
--- Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> [snip]
> No, I don't think this is appropriate. The PerlArray
> class implements
> Perl arrays, and should implement their semantics.
Let me rephrase again :) What should the semantics
for Perl arrays be?
cheers,
Stephen Rawls
___
At 10:24 PM +0100 8/1/02, Graham Barr wrote:
>On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 02:11:27PM -0700, Stephen Rawls wrote:
>> > It should pass them on to the PMC directly, which
>> > should then handle them properly.
>>
>> So, if ix < -SELF->cache.int_val then the code tries
>> to use a negative value to a
At 9:42 PM +0100 8/1/02, Nicholas Clark wrote:
>Am I allowed to write ancillary functions I want the JIT to call in
>assembler? I presume that the JIT needs to go fast, and I suspect that there
>are some bits that are easier to write in assembler (eg rotates for figuring
>out constants) than in C,
At 2:54 PM -0700 8/1/02, Sean O'Rourke wrote:
>On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>> No, I don't think this is appropriate. The PerlArray class implements
>> Perl arrays, and should implement their semantics.
>
>It implements Perl 6 arrays, though. If it's a useful semantic extension
>(res
On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 05:42:12PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 10:24 PM +0100 8/1/02, Graham Barr wrote:
> >On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 02:11:27PM -0700, Stephen Rawls wrote:
> >> > It should pass them on to the PMC directly, which
> >> > should then handle them properly.
> >>
> >> So, if ix <
I can't off-hand see tests that would try to read in and execute
bytecode written all possible combinations of wordsize/byteorder?
--
$jhi++; # http://www.iki.fi/jhi/
# There is this special biologist word we use for 'stable'.
# It is 'dead'. -- Jack Cohen
# New Ticket Created by The RT System itself
# Please include the string: [perl #15929]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=15929 >
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> Here goes. This *isn't* functional - it's the least amount of work I could
> get away with (before midnight) that gets the inner loop of mops.pasm JITted.
>
Applied, many many thanks.
> including this judicious bit of cheating:
> because I need if_i_
On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 01:21:30PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > At 10:34 PM -0300 7/29/02, Daniel Grunblatt wrote:
> > >On Mon, 29 Jul 2002, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> > > > As you can see from the patch all it does is implement the end
> > >and noop o
61 matches
Mail list logo
