Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Below is a rather straightforward patch, but as it represents an
> interface change (albeit a fully backwards compatible one), I thought I
> would post it for discussion.
[ ... ]
> This patch brings Parrot_runops_fromc to parity by providing access to
> thos
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>But that still doesn't solve the problem that a file-handle (after
>>cleaning lexicals) is still in a PMC register, when the C
>>opcode is run.
> True but, and this is the good part, that's not our problem. It is, I
> think, safe to assume that language c
Nicu Ionita <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm trying to compile Parrot on Win XP (with MS Visual C++ authoring edition
> installed) and - after cvs update, nmake realclean, perl Configure.pl -
> nmake works for a while and stops with:
> ...
> astlexer.c
> ast\astlexer.c(1433) : fatal err
Dan Sugalski wrote:
Or not. (I've got too many versions of parrot around at the moment) I
see this bug happening against yesterday morning's parrot.
imcc/CVS/Entries shows a date of Mon Dec 13 12:19:33 2004 for reg_alloc.c.
I still can't reproduce it. CVS fetches either to P16 or even P3 for the
# New Ticket Created by Dave Brondsema
# Please include the string: [perl #33044]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org:80/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=33044 >
PDDs 4-6 (maybe more) are not generated properly on parrotcode.org
--
Dave Brond
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The note here is that Parrot's MMD function signature for binary ops
> doesn't match what Python needs. Parrot is:
> void binary_mmd_op(pmc left, pmc right, pmc dest)
> where Python is:
> pmc dest = left.add(pmc right)
Perl6 allows (according
At 9:31 AM + 12/15/04, Leopold Toetsch via RT wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
Or not. (I've got too many versions of parrot around at the moment) I
see this bug happening against yesterday morning's parrot.
imcc/CVS/Entries shows a date of Mon Dec 13 12:19:33 2004 for reg_alloc.c.
I still can't r
Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't understand this. At all. But the test case added to pyclass.t
> (motivated by test 4 in pie/b3.t) only passes if this change to the
> get_repr op is made.
[ ... ]
> -op get_repr(out STR, in PMC) {
> -$1 = $2->vtable->get_repr(interpret
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Leopold Toetsch writes:
>> Why do we have the special notion of current_object in the first place?
>> Why not just pass all in as P5, P6, ...?
> I agree that this is the way to go. Especially if we have some marker
> somewhere that tells us that we were ca
# New Ticket Created by Dave Brondsema
# Please include the string: [perl #33043]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org:80/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=33043 >
IRC info (host, channels) should be in the main FAQ, especially since
the IMCC FA
Leopold Toetsch writes:
> Why do we have the special notion of current_object in the first place?
> Why not just pass all in as P5, P6, ...?
I agree that this is the way to go. Especially if we have some marker
somewhere that tells us that we were called as a method.
Luke
11 matches
Mail list logo
