Simon Cozens wrote:
>
> I've just committed some changes after which Parrot will not compile.
> This is quite deliberate. Basically, I'm trying to get the keyed stuff
> working the way we want, and that requires some painful changes to the
> source. The upshot is:
>
> All the vtable function
Melvin Smith:
> If I were aware of a parrot-advocacy list I would have started
> the thread there. Maybe there should be one.
There's [EMAIL PROTECTED], or you could take it to somewhere for more
trivial blather, like fwp or perl6-language. But not here. Thanks.
--
s//'"$14$11$9$3$15$1$2$8$3$7$
At 11:26 PM 2/8/2002 +, Simon Cozens wrote:
>Bryan C. Warnock:
> > Although I understand the objection
>
>Can I make another objection? This is a thread about what should be on
>T-shirts, which is taking place on a list about what should be in the
>Parrot source. If you want to contribute to w
Boris Tschirschwitz:
> I read this as
> "please do so here, and then you might perhaps offer your
> opinions regarding the T-shirts."
You read it wrong.
--
Microsoft - We put the "backwards" into backwards compatibility.
I read this as
"please do so here, and then you might perhaps offer your
opinions regarding the T-shirts."
I agree... but it was just three words...
And here's my 180 degree turn:
The camouflage motive is perfect:
camouflage
n : an outward semblance that misrepresents th
Bryan C. Warnock:
> Although I understand the objection
Can I make another objection? This is a thread about what should be on
T-shirts, which is taking place on a list about what should be in the
Parrot source. If you want to contribute to what should be in the
Parrot source, please do so here.
On Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 02:08:54PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> Dan Sugalski writes:
> : At 5:17 PM + 2/8/02, Simon Cozens wrote:
> : >Dan Sugalski:
> : >> Can't. Needs to be a linked list. Otherwise we can't nest data structures
> : >> well.
> : >
> : >Thanks; I knew there had to be a reason,
On Friday 08 February 2002 14:10, Boris Tschirschwitz wrote:
> Please, no military.
Although I understand the objection (maybe not *your* objection, but that
people do and will object), the phrase itself is a military reference, and
it makes little sense to disregard that.
I'm actually quite s
Dan Sugalski writes:
: At 5:17 PM + 2/8/02, Simon Cozens wrote:
: >Dan Sugalski:
: >> Can't. Needs to be a linked list. Otherwise we can't nest data structures
: >> well.
: >
: >Thanks; I knew there had to be a reason, couldn't remember what it was.
:
: Now all we need to do is figure out w
At 10:37 PM 2/8/2002 +0100, Mattia Barbon wrote:
> > FYI: On interp init I already grab the standard handles (io_win32.c) so you
> > could reuse the value for stderr. It might make sense to make the low level
> > handle values extern so other modules can use them. Let me know and
> > I'll put a pa
> FYI: On interp init I already grab the standard handles (io_win32.c) so you
> could reuse the value for stderr. It might make sense to make the low level
> handle values extern so other modules can use them. Let me know and
> I'll put a patch in for it.
I don't know if it is a good idea to expos
At 10:15 PM 2/8/2002 +0100, Mattia Barbon wrote:
> > > The following patch adds a Parrot_nosegfault() function
> > > to win32.c; after it is called, a segmentation fault will print
> > > "This process received a segmentation violation exception"
> > > instead of popping up a dialog. I think it mig
On Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 07:19:26PM +0100, Mattia Barbon wrote:
Content-Description: Mail message body
> The following patch adds a Parrot_nosegfault() function
> to win32.c; after it is called, a segmentation fault will print
> "This process received a segmentation violation exception"
> instead o
> > The following patch adds a Parrot_nosegfault() function
> > to win32.c; after it is called, a segmentation fault will print
> > "This process received a segmentation violation exception"
> > instead of popping up a dialog. I think it might be useful
> > for tinderbox clients.
>
> Please notic
> The following patch adds a Parrot_nosegfault() function
> to win32.c; after it is called, a segmentation fault will print
> "This process received a segmentation violation exception"
> instead of popping up a dialog. I think it might be useful
> for tinderbox clients.
Please notice, stdio is no
Please, no military.
--
Boris Tschirschwitz
University of British Columbia
Mathematics Department
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 8 Feb 2002, Christian Klauss wrote:
> military style :
>
> http://www.gfxspace.com/parrot/parrot3.gif
>
>
Hey that one is nice!
As for myself, that is the look I was thinking about.
-Melvin Smith
IBM :: Atlanta Innovation Center
[EMAIL PROTECTED] :: 770-835-6984
military style :
http://www.gfxspace.com/parrot/parrot3.gif
The following patch adds a Parrot_nosegfault() function
to win32.c; after it is called, a segmentation fault will print
"This process received a segmentation violation exception"
instead of popping up a dialog. I think it might be useful
for tinderbox clients.
Regards
Mattia
Index: platforms/w
On 2/8/02 1:44 PM, Wizard wrote:
> Try this. It's might be too 1970's, though.
Also too carcinogenic ;)
-John
At 5:17 PM + 2/8/02, Simon Cozens wrote:
>Dan Sugalski:
>> Can't. Needs to be a linked list. Otherwise we can't nest data structures
>> well.
>
>Thanks; I knew there had to be a reason, couldn't remember what it was.
Now all we need to do is figure out whether keys at the lowest levels
wil
One of the cool ramifications of having real multidimensional arrays
just hit me. We could do something like:
my GD @array : size(200,200), colordepth(24), format('PNG');
and then treat @array as an image, with each element in the array
representing a pixel. The stringified version of the
Dan Sugalski:
> Can't. Needs to be a linked list. Otherwise we can't nest data structures
> well.
Thanks; I knew there had to be a reason, couldn't remember what it was.
--
> I'm a person, not a piece of property.
Happily, I'm both!
- Lionel and Stephen Harris.
Gregor N. Purdy writes:
: I think of slicing as a shortcut for map.
:
:foo[1,2,3] ===map { foo[$_] } (1,2,3)
:
: I think of multidimensionality as arrays-of-arrays:
:
:foo[1][2]
:
: As for combining the two, I guess that would be
:
:foo[1,2][3,4] =~= temp = map { foo[$_] }
At 4:08 PM + 2/8/02, Simon Cozens wrote:
>Larry Wall:
>> I just think of multidimensionality as another "list of" dimension on
>> top of the slices. Alternately, you can think of it as another
>> dimension on each leaf that turns each scalar into a list. But the
>> extra dimension has to
Larry --
> Simon Cozens writes:
> : Gregor N. Purdy:
> : > I was only involved in a small amount of 'key' discussion. FWIW, I
> : > would have thought the KEY_PAIR thingee was for (array) slice ranges,
> : > not multidimensional indexing...
> :
> : Then it's doubly mis-named, because KEY_PAIR ho
Melvin --
> Then you can play on words like "Ops", etc.
Yeah. I'd like to have a "Special Ops" variant
You can also play on core/corps, as long as you don't conflate them
into corpse.
Regards,
-- Gregor
/I
Larry Wall:
> I just think of multidimensionality as another "list of" dimension on
> top of the slices. Alternately, you can think of it as another
> dimension on each leaf that turns each scalar into a list. But the
> extra dimension has to sneak in there somewhere if we're to allow
> multidim
Simon --
> > I was only involved in a small amount of 'key' discussion. FWIW, I
> > would have thought the KEY_PAIR thingee was for (array) slice ranges,
> > not multidimensional indexing...
>
> Then it's doubly mis-named, because KEY_PAIR holds a single key, not a
> pair of anything, and KEY ho
Simon Cozens writes:
: Gregor N. Purdy:
: > I was only involved in a small amount of 'key' discussion. FWIW, I
: > would have thought the KEY_PAIR thingee was for (array) slice ranges,
: > not multidimensional indexing...
:
: Then it's doubly mis-named, because KEY_PAIR holds a single key, not a
Try this. It's might be too 1970's, though.
Grant M.
parrot.gif
Description: GIF image
On Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 01:18:20PM +, Dave Mitchell wrote:
> Simon Cozens wrote:
> > Dave Mitchell:
> > > I'm trying to nip the following in the bud, which is daunting for someone
> > > trying to work out what's what for the first time.
> > >
> > > ls perl-current/
> >
> > I see your point,
I apologize for the retarded format of my replies from work.
If I knew how to drive Lotus Notes better I'd fix it.
-Melvin Smith
IBM :: Atlanta Innovation Center
[EMAIL PROTECTED] :: 770-835-6984
Gregor N. Purdy:
> I was only involved in a small amount of 'key' discussion. FWIW, I
> would have thought the KEY_PAIR thingee was for (array) slice ranges,
> not multidimensional indexing...
Then it's doubly mis-named, because KEY_PAIR holds a single key, not a
pair of anything, and KEY holds a
-Melvin Smith
IBM :: Atlanta Innovation Center
[EMAIL PROTECTED] :: 770-835-6984
Garrett Goebel
Title: RE: Parrot Trooper
From: Dan Sugalski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> At 7:09 AM -0500 2/6/02, Gregor N. Purdy wrote:
> >Melvin --
> >
> >
> >> I'd like to do a Parrot Trooper t-shirt or something along > >> those lines. Maybe some of you guys have some cool theme
> >> we could use, bu
On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 08:40:41PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> [...] I'm also trying to get a regular, if I'm
> lucky every issue, Parrot/Perl 6 article in The Perl Review.
Speaking on behalf of TPR, the only bottleneck here is providing
a regular article/update on Parrot/Perl6 for each issue.
Simon --
I was only involved in a small amount of 'key' discussion. FWIW, I
would have thought the KEY_PAIR thingee was for (array) slice ranges,
not multidimensional indexing...
> > If the KEY* has one KEY_PAIR element which is numeric, you've got an index
> > into an array; if it has one KEY_P
Simon Cozens wrote:
> Dave Mitchell:
> > I'm trying to nip the following in the bud, which is daunting for someone
> > trying to work out what's what for the first time.
> >
> > ls perl-current/
>
> I see your point, but I don't think 'ls perl-current/src' is much better. :)
True, but the point
Dave Mitchell:
> I'm trying to nip the following in the bud, which is daunting for someone
> trying to work out what's what for the first time.
>
> ls perl-current/
I see your point, but I don't think 'ls perl-current/src' is much better. :)
If we're going to do anything I think we should separ
Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Melvin Smith:
> > I agree with your config/ dir suggestion, but I'm not sure about
> > moving everything else down into perl6/parrot subdirectory,
>
> Me neither. I don't see much point in it.
I'm trying to nip the following in the bud, which is daunting
Simon Cozens:
> If the KEY* has one KEY_PAIR element which is numeric, you've got an index
> into an array; if it has one KEY_PAIR element which is a string or a PMC*,
> you've got an index into a hash. If it has multiple KEY_PAIR elements,
> you're dealing with a multidimensional hash or array.
Simon Cozens:
> I'm working on unbreaking it, patches welcome.
Unfortunately, it seems the way that key.c works is currently a lot more
broken than I suspected. :( This is going to take some time.
The plan, such as it is, is that a KEY* structure is an index, rather
than being an aggregate itsel
I've just committed some changes after which Parrot will not compile.
This is quite deliberate. Basically, I'm trying to get the keyed stuff
working the way we want, and that requires some painful changes to the
source. The upshot is:
All the vtable functions _index and index_s are dead; they
Peter Hickman wrote:
> If we wrote a GUI library in parrot, a sort of Tkinter, and
> our widgets compiled down to parrot then we would have
> a consistent GUI library where widgets could be shared
> across languages and across platforms.
How about wxWindows?
http://www.wxwindows.org
Chec
45 matches
Mail list logo
