On Sat, 7 Sep 2002, Markus Laire wrote:
> On 6 Sep 2002 at 11:15, Andy Dougherty wrote:
>
> > I've been told that my patch #16937 (which changes ld_shared from the
> > hard-wired wrong value of -shared to $Config{lddlflags}, which is the
> > variable designed in perl5 for this precise use) break
Er... it is a silly thing to ask, but is there any way to write C code that comes out
assembled in Parrot?
Has C been targeted at parrot? Is it a logical thing to do? Does it make sense. (I
tried this in my brain for three days and am still confused over whether it is a
sensible thing to do)
# New Ticket Created by Andy Dougherty
# Please include the string: [perl #17084]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=17084 >
Under traditional Unix loaders (ld), the order in which items are
specified in the co
On Mon, 2002-09-09 at 09:07, Ramesh Ananthakrishnan wrote:
>
> Er... it is a silly thing to ask, but is there any way to write C code that comes
>out assembled in Parrot?
>
> Has C been targeted at parrot? Is it a logical thing to do? Does it make sense. (I
>tried this in my brain for three d
On Sun, 8 Sep 2002, Steve Fink wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 07:46:38PM -0400, John Porter wrote:
> > Steve Fink wrote:
> > > Here is the new PMC I keep babbling about. Before I commit it, any
> > > comments? Like, does anybody think this should be named differently?
> > > It's really a dequ
On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> On Mon 02 Sep 2002 22:25, Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Similarly, it may be a good time to revisit our "core" platforms and see
> > if they all work. A lot of the library stuff, especially the shared
> > library stuff, is rather d
I wrote,
> The t/src/intlist test still fails for me -- I just got
>
> t/src/intlist...# Failed test (t/src/intlist.t at line 108)
> # got: 'Step 1: 0
> # Failed:
> # '
> # expected: 'Step 1: 0
> # Step 2: 1
> # Step 3: 2
> # Step 4: 255
> # Step 5: 256
> # Step 6: 257
> #
On Mon 09 Sep 2002 17:39, Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
>
> > On Mon 02 Sep 2002 22:25, Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Similarly, it may be a good time to revisit our "core" platforms and see
> > > if they all work.
On Sun, 8 Sep 2002, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> from perl5-porters:
>
> > > Are we going to assimilate what parrot is doing in all its C files -
> > > * vim: expandtab shiftwidth=4:
> > For most vi versions the portable vi modeline would be
> > * vi: set expandtab shiftwidth=4:
>
> Would chang
On Mon 09 Sep 2002 18:36, Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Sep 2002, Nicholas Clark wrote:
>
> > from perl5-porters:
> >
> > > > Are we going to assimilate what parrot is doing in all its C files -
>
> > > > * vim: expandtab shiftwidth=4:
>
> > > For most vi versions the
On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> On Mon 09 Sep 2002 18:36, Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sun, 8 Sep 2002, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> >
> > > from perl5-porters:
> > >
> > > > > Are we going to assimilate what parrot is doing in all its C files -
> >
> > > > > * vim
On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> Thanks for running the tests. If you're really ambitious, you could
>
> cd languages/perl6
> make
>
> and see what happens, but unless you've got bison and flex installed,
> don't bother (I submitted a patch to pregenerate the files, but it'
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> >> Cool, applied. How far from "real" scheme are we?
> >
> > I think its quite far.
> > The first thing is symbols and strings. But how do I represent them at
> > parrot-level. PerlString maybe, but then how will they be distinct
> > from each ot
I'd like to start a dialog about the P[arrot|erl] interface on the
matter of converting low-level types. ord and chr are Perl functions for
doing two very specialized conversions, but I'm thinking Parrot needs to
provide a general-purpose number/[bit]?string conversion ala Perl's
pack/unpack so t
On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Sean O'Rourke wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> > Now why that [languages] isn't part of the default build, I don't
> > know.
> None of the stuff in languages/ is part of the default build, and I think
> it should stay that way. It seems like bad form to
On 9 Sep 2002 at 15:02, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Sean O'Rourke wrote:
>
> > None of the stuff in languages/ is part of the default build, and I think
> > it should stay that way. It seems like bad form to, by default, build
> > parts of a package that the user may not want t
Attached is a patch for the Befunge interpreter:
- support of the chr instruction instead of Clinton's hack
- a Changes file
Oh, btw, I'm now using cvs diff in order to create my patches (thanks Leon) -
it rocks! I hope they are still valid patches.
Jérôme
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: parro
Hi,
I have several questions regarding lexicals.
There is a discrepancy between parrot_assembly.pod and core.ops
parrot_assembly.pod says that find_lex will return a pointer, where as
core.ops uses find_lex to retrive a value and store_lex to set this
value. Which of this is correct?
parrot_ass
On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 03:02:55PM -0400, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Sean O'Rourke wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Andy Dougherty wrote:
>
> > > Now why that [languages] isn't part of the default build, I don't
> > > know.
>
> > None of the stuff in languages/ is part of the
> On 6 Sep 2002 at 11:15, Andy Dougherty wrote:
>
> > I've been told that my patch #16937 (which changes ld_shared from the
> > hard-wired wrong value of -shared to $Config{lddlflags}, which is the
> > variable designed in perl5 for this precise use) breaks cygwin. But in
> > the current state o
On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
[HP-UX 11.00, GNU gcc-3.2]
> > cd languages/perl6
> > make
>
> For gcc (which was the last I used) I got :(
>
> /usr/bin/ld -o imcc imcparser.o imclexer.o imc.o stacks.o symreg.o instructions.o
>cfg.o sets.o debug.o anyop.o ../../platform.o
# New Ticket Created by Andy Dougherty
# Please include the string: [perl #17090]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=17090 >
The subject says it all.
diff -r -u parrot-orig/config/gen/makefiles/imcc.in
parrot
# New Ticket Created by Andy Dougherty
# Please include the string: [perl #17091]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=17091 >
Not OK: This is a failure report for parrot.
64-bit-int builds appear to be broken.
On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> 64-bit-int builds appear to be broken. This is from Linux/SPARC with
> INTVAL='long long'. This configuration used to work quite recently.
I've at least figured out why it core dumps -- do_panic() assumes we've
got a valid interpreter, and tries to p
At 03:01 PM 9/9/2002 -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote:
>I'd like to start a dialog
And since this thread is quiet, I'll throw some uneducated opinions on it
to help it along.
>about the P[arrot|erl] interface on the
>matter of converting low-level types. ord and chr are Perl functions for
>doing two
On Mon, 2002-09-09 at 21:42, Clinton A. Pierce wrote:
> >Should these conversions be individual instructions (e.g. "uint2string")
> >or should there be a single-target "pack" analog in the PBC?
>
> I like the idea of having a single pack/unpack instruction, with some kind
> of argument mechanis
Any particular reason not to have a specific make target for the
tinderboxen?
Nicholas Clark wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 03:02:55PM -0400, Andy Dougherty wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Sean O'Rourke wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Andy Dougherty wrote:
>>
Now why that [languages] i
On Lundi 9 Septembre 2002 21:44, Jerome Quelin wrote :
> Attached is a patch for the Befunge interpreter:
> - support of the chr instruction instead of Clinton's hack
> - a Changes file
Uh, cvs diff does not handle new files (and cvs add needs write access to the
repository). So attached is th
On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 11:42:23AM -0400, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> I wrote,
>
> > The t/src/intlist test still fails for me -- I just got
> > ...
>
> and here's the simple fix:
Doh! Thanks, sheepishly applied. I want a flag
-fwhen_behavior_is_undefined_do_the_worst_possible_thing.
On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 01:28:37PM +, Andy Dougherty wrote:
>
> Under traditional Unix loaders (ld), the order in which items are
> specified in the command line matters. Without this patch, -lm appears
> before libparrot.a, so at the time libm is encountered, no symbols are
> needed and not
Is it possible to write networking code in Parrot?
-
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes
31 matches
Mail list logo
