RE: typo in pmc.h??

Simon Cozens: # On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 09:14:37PM -0600, Gopal Rajaraman wrote: # > There seems to be a typo in either pmc.h or parrotpointer.pmc # # Yes, it's in parrotpointer.pmc. Thanks, fixed. # # And minus several points to those checking in code that # doesn't compile. :) It was me. I tho

[PATCH] Fix warning, fix wrong int type on Solaris

Try #2, my first was lost in the mail or something. Index: rx.ops === RCS file: /home/perlcvs/parrot/rx.ops,v retrieving revision 1.4 diff -a -u -r1.4 rx.ops --- rx.ops 11 Jan 2002 05:34:00 - 1.4 +++ rx.ops 11 Jan

Re: Another regex question

At 10:02 PM 1/11/2002 -0600, David M. Lloyd wrote: >Just out of curiosity, is the regex compiler going to be written in Parrot >or C? Probably either perl or C. It'll be considered just another language by the parser. Dan

[PATCH] rx.t passes all tests on Solaris builds

This patch fixes a warning and also changes an 'int' to an 'INTVAL'. All tests should pass on Solaris. Index: rx.ops === RCS file: /home/perlcvs/parrot/rx.ops,v retrieving revision 1.4 diff -a -u -r1.4 rx.ops --- rx.ops 11 Jan

Re: Question about "match" vtable method and regexes

At 09:05 PM 1/11/2002 -0600, David M. Lloyd wrote: >I have a design question here. Why did we take the approach of having a >match method on every single vtable, instead of having a vtable for >regular expressions, and have regex be an object (like Perl 5)? So we could do: @results = @foo ^=

brief RANT (on warnings)

What's the point of having a policy of turning gcc's warnings to painful levels when it appears that commit policy will accept new code that increases the number of compiler warnings? eg, why is there need to patch this? --- global_setup.c.orig Thu Jan 10 18:01:51 2002 +++ global_setup.c Sa

RE: Question about "match" vtable method and regexes

Dan Sugalski: # At 10:23 AM 1/12/2002 -0600, David M. Lloyd wrote: # >On Sat, 12 Jan 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote: # > # > > At 09:05 PM 1/11/2002 -0600, David M. Lloyd wrote: # > > >I have a design question here. Why did we take the # approach of having a # > > >match method on every single vtable,

Re: [PATCH] jumps with pbc2c.pl

At 12:02 AM 1/12/2002 +, Nicholas Clark wrote: >On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 12:54:08PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > At 06:01 PM 1/10/2002 -0500, Jason Gloudon wrote: > > >Here is a patch that makes pbc2c generated code work with the bsr > opcode. It > > >creates a new opcode 'enternative', and

[PATCH] Parrot::Test meets Test::Builder

Here's a patch to eliminate the EvilSubWrapper from Parrot::Test. This should make Parrot::Test much easier to maintain. Update to Test::More 0.41 which adds Test::Builder Delete the vestigal Test::Utils Change Parrot::Test so it uses Test::Builder instead of Evil Wrappers aroun

Re: Flags to pmc.h. *Important for class creators!*

On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 05:43:28PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote: > Okay, I've added some flags to pmc.h. They are: > > PMC_active_destroy_FLAG = 2 << 8, > PMC_is_container_FLAG = 2 << 9, > PMC_is_buffer_ptr_FLAG= 2 << 10, > PMC_is_PMC_ptr_FLAG = 2 << 11, >

Re: Question about "match" vtable method and regexes

On Sat, 12 Jan 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote: > At 09:05 PM 1/11/2002 -0600, David M. Lloyd wrote: > >I have a design question here. Why did we take the approach of having a > >match method on every single vtable, instead of having a vtable for > >regular expressions, and have regex be an object (lik

[PATCH] Change NUMVAL_FMT to FLOATVAL_FMT

Subject says it all... Index: Configure.pl === RCS file: /home/perlcvs/parrot/Configure.pl,v retrieving revision 1.77 diff -a -u -r1.77 Configure.pl --- Configure.pl9 Jan 2002 17:24:11 - 1.77 +++ Configure.pl

Re: tinderbox in flames...

At 04:26 PM 1/11/2002 -0800, Jesse wrote: >With current cvs, I get the following running Configure.pl-- > > Building ./testparrotsizes.cfrom testparrotsizes_c.in... >In file included from include/parrot/parrot.h:75, > from testparrotsizes.c:9: >include/parrot/string.

Re: Question about "match" vtable method and regexes

On Sat, 12 Jan 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote: > At 10:23 AM 1/12/2002 -0600, David M. Lloyd wrote: > >On Sat, 12 Jan 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > > > > At 09:05 PM 1/11/2002 -0600, David M. Lloyd wrote: > > > >I have a design question here. Why did we take the approach of having a > > > >match metho

RE: Another regex question

Dan Sugalski: # At 10:02 PM 1/11/2002 -0600, David M. Lloyd wrote: # >Just out of curiosity, is the regex compiler going to be # written in Parrot # >or C? # # Probably either perl or C. It'll be considered just another # language by the # parser. You sure about that? I've got an rx_compile op s

[PATCH] bsr with prederef [Was Re: [PATCH] jumps with pbc2c.pl]

Here is a patch that fixes prederef with respect to bsr. -- Jason Index: interpreter.c === RCS file: /home/perlcvs/parrot/interpreter.c,v retrieving revision 1.57 diff -u -r1.57 interpreter.c --- interpreter.c 12 Jan 2002 1

Big Bucket o' Warnings

Attached is a build of a just rsync'd parrot on Linux/PowerPC machine. Stock configure using Debian's perl (so nothing fancy like 64bit integers). There's a lot of warnings. -- Michael G. Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/ Perl Quality Assurance <[EMAIL PROTEC

Re: [PATCH] jumps with pbc2c.pl

On Sat, Jan 12, 2002 at 10:26:37AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote: [on prederef going SEGV with the bsr opcode] > I'm not going to worry too much about it for the moment, as I'm not sure > what the ultimate fate of the prederef stuff will be. If the JIT works out > well on most of our platforms, we

typo in pmc.h??

There seems to be a typo in either pmc.h or parrotpointer.pmc pmc.h has: PMC_private_GC_FLAG = 2 << 12 but parrotpointer.pmc has void init () { SELF->data=NULL; SELF->flags=PMC_private_gc_FLAG; ## you get a compile error at this line } This causes the build to fail. Rega

Re: [PATCH] unused variables [APPLIED]

At 11:03 PM 1/7/2002 +, Nicholas Clark wrote: >If I've got this right, then this patch silences all warnings about unused >variables, except for those from the ops files. Applied. Thanks. (And sorry for the delay) Dan -

Re: Question about "match" vtable method and regexes

At 10:23 AM 1/12/2002 -0600, David M. Lloyd wrote: >On Sat, 12 Jan 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > > At 09:05 PM 1/11/2002 -0600, David M. Lloyd wrote: > > >I have a design question here. Why did we take the approach of having a > > >match method on every single vtable, instead of having a vtable f

Re: [PATCH] rx.t passes all tests on Solaris builds

At 05:22 PM 1/11/2002 -0600, David M. Lloyd wrote: >This patch fixes a warning and also changes an 'int' to an 'INTVAL'. All >tests should pass on Solaris. Applied, thanks. Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan

Re: typo in pmc.h??

On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 09:14:37PM -0600, Gopal Rajaraman wrote: > There seems to be a typo in either pmc.h or parrotpointer.pmc Yes, it's in parrotpointer.pmc. Thanks, fixed. And minus several points to those checking in code that doesn't compile. :) -- DESPAIR: It's Always Darkest Just B

jit2h.pl incredibly slow!

The latest version of jit2h.pl is taking a very long time to run on my machine - upwards of two minutes, which is longer than the rest of the build put together! It doesn't appear to be broken, as Parrot still builds fine, but it is rather annoying. Any idea what's causing this slow-down

Re: typo in pmc.h??

On Fri, 11 Jan 2002, Gopal Rajaraman wrote: > There seems to be a typo in either pmc.h or parrotpointer.pmc > > pmc.h has: > PMC_private_GC_FLAG = 2 << 12 > > but parrotpointer.pmc has > void init () { > SELF->data=NULL; > SELF->flags=PMC_private_gc_FLAG; ## you get a compile

Flags to pmc.h. *Important for class creators!*

Okay, I've added some flags to pmc.h. They are: PMC_active_destroy_FLAG= 2 << 8, PMC_is_container_FLAG = 2 << 9, PMC_is_buffer_ptr_FLAG = 2 << 10, PMC_is_PMC_ptr_FLAG= 2 << 11, PMC_private_GC_FLAG= 2 << 12 active_destroy must