On Thu, 10 Aug 2000, Jeremy Howard wrote:
At 07:07 PM 8/9/00 -0400, Karl Glazebrook wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 11:27 PM 8/9/00 +1000, Jeremy Howard wrote:
5- Compact array storage: RFC still coming
I hope this RFC will be "Arrays should be sparse when possible, and
At 09:57 PM 8/9/00 -0700, Matthew Cline wrote:
On Wed, 09 Aug 2000, Nathan Torkington wrote:
It seems to me that a perl5 program exists as several things:
- pure source code (ASCII or Unicode)
- a stream of tokens from the parser
- a munged stream of tokens from the parser (e.g., use
At 10:01 PM 8/9/00 -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
Would it make sense for the parsing of a Perl program to be done as:
- tokenize without rewriting (e.g., use stays as it is)
- structure without rewriting (e.g., constant subs are unfolded)
- rewrite for optimizations and actual ops
The
You may also want to be able to short circuit some of the steps.
Especially where the startup time may outweigh the win of optimization.
And if there could be different execution engines. Machine level,
bytecode, (and perhaps straight out of the syntax tree.)
Hmm, might that make some debugging
"NT" == Nathan Torkington [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
NT - source filters munge the pure source code
NT - cpp-like macros would work with token streams
NT - pretty printers need unmunged tokens in an unoptimized tree, which
NTmay well be unfeasible
I was thinking of macros as being passed
At 03:36 PM 8/10/00 -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
You may also want to be able to short circuit some of the steps.
Especially where the startup time may outweigh the win of optimization.
The only one that's skippable is the optimizer, really. I'd planned on
having to pass it some indicator of
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At 03:35 PM 8/9/00 -0700, Damien Neil wrote:
On Wed, Aug 09, 2000 at 03:32:41PM -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
Each sub is assigned an index. This index is unique for the package
the sub is in, and all ancestor packages.
Add all sibling packages of all the
At 08:16 PM 8/10/00 +, Nick Ing-Simmons wrote:
The first runtime reassignment of @ISA shoots this one down hard. Sorry.
(MI also makes it more difficult, since dependency trees will have to be
built...)
Yes - this is why Malcolm dodged MI with 'fields' module.
I'm not sure we can, or
"GB" == Graham Barr [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
GB On Thu, Aug 10, 2000 at 04:54:25PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 08:31 PM 8/10/00 +, Nick Ing-Simmons wrote:
You just re-invented "look up the name in a hash table" ;-)
You now have one big hash table rather than several small ones.
Dan Sugalski wrote:
Strong typing and sparse arrays are orthogonal--no reason we shouldn't use
them if someone does:
$foo[time]
or something of the sort. (People like huge arrays with few scalars in
them too... :)
Good point. It also occurs to me that we would want some syntax to say
Michael Fowler wrote:
Which then raises a few more problems (whew): how do you coax user input
(which is an SV) into a value $foo can accept with very-strict on?
You run it through an explicit conversion process, like using Catoi() in
a C program
Unfortunately, this involves more
11 matches
Mail list logo
