RE: +2 Axe of Refactoring: packfile.c

Simon Cozens: # People were complaining about bloat already? Well, I'm not a # great believer in # taking 1800 lines to do what you can do more clearly in 700; # nor taking 43 # functions, many of which are completely unused, to do the # work of 14. This # refactoring does not attempt to disguise

Re: +2 Axe of Refactoring: packfile.c

(Apologies to Michael Brown) Yesterday on perl6-intern-, packfile.c died. And they got that brit Simon on a charge of homicide Some folks say he didn't do it others say of course he did But they all agree, Mr Simon C. was a problem kinda kid 'Cause you can't chop your Parrot up on Perl 6 Porters

Re: rethinking printf

> "PS" == Peter Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: PS> At 01:39 AM 3/11/02 +0100, Eugene van der Pijll wrote: >> Why not replace the escape character '%' with '#'? No new quoting >> operators or functions to learn. PS> Beat me to it. >> And introduce a warning if there are >> no

+2 Axe of Refactoring: packfile.c

People were complaining about bloat already? Well, I'm not a great believer in taking 1800 lines to do what you can do more clearly in 700; nor taking 43 functions, many of which are completely unused, to do the work of 14. This refactoring does not attempt to disguise the fact that C is not objec

Re: PMC change: was RE: cvs commit: parrot/lib/Parrot Assembler.pm

Melvin Smith: > Agreed, hence my mail last night asking for objections. I didn't object. :) But I do think that patching the current interpreter is slightly futile, since I've got about three-quarters of the new one done and it's a damned sight simpler. Simon -- [Bastille Linux] Of course, if

Re: rethinking printf

At 01:39 AM 3/11/02 +0100, Eugene van der Pijll wrote: >Why not replace the escape character '%' with '#'? No new quoting >operators or functions to learn. Beat me to it. >And introduce a warning if there are >no #'s in the format string. Maybe if it's a constant, but not if you're doing someth

Re: rethinking printf

> "BD" == Brent Dax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: BD> Uri Guttman: BD> # $prec = %hash{width} ; BD> # sprintf( qf"%${prec}s", $string); BD> # BD> # sprintf( "\%${prec}s", $string); BD> # BD> # is one of your alternatives. :-/ BD> You forgot one. BD> sprintf('%'_%hash{width

Re: rethinking printf

Why not replace the escape character '%' with '#'? No new quoting operators or functions to learn. And introduce a warning if there are no #'s in the format string. Eugene

RE: rethinking printf

Uri Guttman: # > "BD" == Brent Dax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: # # BD> I think qn counts as weird syntax. I ask again, what's # wrong with one # BD> of: # # BD> sprintf("%hash\%s", $string); # # BD> sprintf(%hash.'%s', $string); # BD> sprintf('%s%s', _%hash,

Re: rethinking printf

> "BD" == Brent Dax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: BD> I think qn counts as weird syntax. I ask again, what's wrong with one BD> of: BD> sprintf("%hash\%s", $string); BD> sprintf(%hash.'%s', $string); BD> sprintf('%s%s', _%hash, $string); what if you want to use %hash{width}

Re: [BUG] Integer overflow in JIT mode?

At 05:57 PM 3/10/2002 -0500, Simon Glover wrote: > In Parrot's standard operational mode, the following code[1]: > > set N2, -2147483648.0 > set I2, N2 > print I2 > print "\n" > end > > produces the output: > > -2147483648 > > but in JIT m

[APPLIED] Re: [PATCH] PerlString tests

On Sun, Mar 10, 2002 at 05:22:18PM -0500, Simon Glover wrote: > > More tests for the PerlString test-suite. On Sun, Mar 10, 2002 at 05:19:51PM -0500, Simon Glover wrote: > > Self-explanatory. > +output_is(

[BUG] Integer overflow in JIT mode?

In Parrot's standard operational mode, the following code[1]: set N2, -2147483648.0 set I2, N2 print I2 print "\n" end produces the output: -2147483648 but in JIT mode (on an x86) it produces: -0 This smacks of some kind of overfl

RE: new_tracked_header()

Melvin Smith: # I'm confused on the intent of the following: # # Buffer *new_tracked_header(struct Parrot_Interp *interpreter, # size_t size) { #UNUSED (interpreter); #return (Buffer *)mem_sys_allocate(size); # } # # # A Buffer is a fixed size struct with void * for data, # however, this t

new_tracked_header()

I'm confused on the intent of the following: Buffer *new_tracked_header(struct Parrot_Interp *interpreter, size_t size) { UNUSED (interpreter); return (Buffer *)mem_sys_allocate(size); } A Buffer is a fixed size struct with void * for data, however, this takes a size argument. I assume

PMC change: was RE: cvs commit: parrot/lib/Parrot Assembler.pm

At 02:24 PM 3/10/2002 -0800, Brent Dax wrote: ># Single line changes to add a size argument to a the constructors. > >Small diff, big changes. A one-line diff in the right place can >increase or decrease size or speed a thousandfold. This alters the Agreed, however I hope any of us with commit

[PATCH] PerlString tests

More tests for the PerlString test-suite. Simon --- t/pmc/perlstring.t.old Sun Mar 10 14:14:16 2002 +++ t/pmc/perlstring.t Sun Mar 10 17:14:29 2002 @@ -1,8 +1,51 @@ #! perl -w -use Parrot::Test tests => 6; +use Parrot::Test tests => 8; use Test::More; # Included for skip().

[PATCH] Test for sleep with negative argument

Self-explanatory. Simon --- time.t.old Sun Mar 10 13:47:03 2002 +++ time.t Sun Mar 10 13:48:46 2002 @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ #! perl -w -use Parrot::Test tests => 3; +use Parrot::Test tests => 4; output_is(<<'CODE', <<'OUTPUT', "time_i"); timeI0 @@ -64,4 +64,10 @@ start done O

RE: cvs commit: parrot/lib/Parrot Assembler.pm

Melvin Smith: # At 02:02 PM 3/10/2002 -0800, Brent Dax wrote: # >[EMAIL PROTECTED]: # ># cvsuser 02/03/10 13:15:50 # ># # ># Modified:lib/Parrot Assembler.pm # ># Log: # ># Minor patch to the assembler for the new_p_ic_ic opcode to # ># work same as new_p_ic (looks up a named class

RE: cvs commit: parrot/lib/Parrot Assembler.pm

At 02:02 PM 3/10/2002 -0800, Brent Dax wrote: >[EMAIL PROTECTED]: ># cvsuser 02/03/10 13:15:50 ># ># Modified:lib/Parrot Assembler.pm ># Log: ># Minor patch to the assembler for the new_p_ic_ic opcode to ># work same as new_p_ic (looks up a named class). >Did Dan, Simon, or someone

[APPLIED] Re: [PATCH] More regex tests

On Sun, Mar 10, 2002 at 01:40:09PM -0500, Simon Glover wrote: > > Enclosed patch fixes up a few more holes in our test coverage. Thanks, applied Nicholas Clark -- Even better than the real thing:http://nms-cgi.sourceforge.net/

RE: cvs commit: parrot/lib/Parrot Assembler.pm

[EMAIL PROTECTED]: # cvsuser 02/03/10 13:15:50 # # Modified:lib/Parrot Assembler.pm # Log: # Minor patch to the assembler for the new_p_ic_ic opcode to # work same as new_p_ic (looks up a named class). # # Also added small hack for .sub directive (which simply translates # to a

RE: rethinking printf

Abigail: # I'd think it would be much better that '%' followed by a word *not* # followed by a { isn't interpolated. Granted, you cannot do # interpolation # of hashes (well, one could always write "@{[%hash]}", just # like in perl5, # and there's little change of clashing with printf formats. # T

RE: rethinking printf

Uri Guttman: # i disagree. but we shall see if larry is listening to this thread and # will back away from hash interpolation or take some of our suggestions # that make it work without killing format strings. i hate to see a # special call or wierd syntax for that. my qn (or qf) # suggestion seem

Re: rethinking printf

> "a" == abigail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: a> On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 11:15:30PM -0500, Uri Guttman wrote: >> >> good point. $() can still wrap that but then there has to be a balance >> between printf strings and double quoters. how about this wacky idea: >> >> make a new ty

Re: rethinking printf

On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 11:15:30PM -0500, Uri Guttman wrote: > > "BL" == Bart Lateur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > BL> On Wed, 6 Mar 2002 17:57:07 -0500, Uri Guttman wrote: > >> how often will you need to interpolate a hash? > > BL> A whole hash: quite rarely. A hash item: a LOT. Don

[PATCH] More regex tests

Enclosed patch fixes up a few more holes in our test coverage. Simon --- t/op/rx.t.old Sun Mar 10 13:14:34 2002 +++ t/op/rx.t Sun Mar 10 13:36:01 2002 @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -use Parrot::Test tests => 22; +use Parrot::Test tests => 27; use Test::More; sub gentest($$;$$) { @@ -64,

[PATCH] Tiny de-typo in rx.ops documentation

Should be self-explanatory. Simon --- rx.ops.old Sun Mar 10 12:54:51 2002 +++ rx.ops Sun Mar 10 12:55:18 2002 @@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ # NOTE: This looks a LOT scarier than it really is # "zzabbBBcdcdcdzz" =~ /ab*[cd]+/i - rx_allocateinfo P0, "zzabbBBcdcd

RE: Parrot runtime footprint -- looking kind of big for embedded use...

Simon Cozens: # Burl Nyswonger: # > The ability to build the VM in an extremely stripped-down # configuration # > would be really useful for embedded environments (where you # only have, say # > a 4MB flash that must hold a kernel, all libs, apps, etc...). # # By the time Parrot's ready to be

Re: Parrot runtime footprint -- looking kind of big for embedded use...

Burl Nyswonger: > The ability to build the VM in an extremely stripped-down configuration > would be really useful for embedded environments (where you only have, say > a 4MB flash that must hold a kernel, all libs, apps, etc...). By the time Parrot's ready to be embedded, memory prices will hav