Hi Mike
> We have three memory_pools: memory, string, and constant_string. Is there
> any reason that string and memory are distinct? (aside from code
> simplicity).
> Seems to create a lot of duplicate logic with the need to support a string
> version and a generic buffer version of everything,
Dan Sugalski:
# At 5:28 PM -0700 5/16/02, Brent Dax wrote:
# >Dan Sugalski:
# ># Okay, I've checked in the final changes to this edit of
# PDD 2, the #
# >vtable pdd. Tine to rip into it^W^W^Wexamine it closely. :)
# >
# >I guess I'm first.
# >
# >I think the PARROT_TRUE/PARROT_FALSE thing is a
--
On Thu, 16 May 2002 12:36:42
Miko O'Sullivan wrote:
>SUMMARY
>
>Arrays should always have known lengths because that's what arrays do. This
>requirement is enforced culturally, not programmatically.
I totally agree that this should be enforced culturally. I think that the way a tied
At 5:28 PM -0700 5/16/02, Brent Dax wrote:
>Dan Sugalski:
># Okay, I've checked in the final changes to this edit of PDD 2, the
># vtable pdd. Tine to rip into it^W^W^Wexamine it closely. :)
>
>I guess I'm first.
>
>I think the PARROT_TRUE/PARROT_FALSE thing is a Really Bad Idea.
I'm not thrilled
Dan Sugalski:
# Okay, I've checked in the final changes to this edit of PDD 2, the
# vtable pdd. Tine to rip into it^W^W^Wexamine it closely. :)
I guess I'm first.
I think the PARROT_TRUE/PARROT_FALSE thing is a Really Bad Idea.
I understand that we need a way to indicate exceptions. However,
On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 04:25:39PM -0300, Daniel Grunblatt wrote:
>
> On Thu, 9 May 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>
> > Anyone care to take this task on? It doesn't have to be at all fancy.
> > In fact, all it needs to do is handle:
> >
> >*) Label offset calcs
> >*) Explicit, fully-qualifie
At 06:11 PM 5/16/2002 -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote:
>On Thu, 2002-05-16 at 16:07, Mike Lambert wrote:
>There're three stages:
>
> 1. "compile time" -- When a module or program is byte-coded
> 2. "load time" -- When byte-code is loaded off of disk
> 3. "run time" -- When the p
Okay, I've checked in the final changes to this edit of PDD 2, the
vtable pdd. Tine to rip into it^W^W^Wexamine it closely. :)
--
Dan
--"it's like this"---
Dan Sugalski even sam
# New Ticket Created by "Wild Cats"
# Please include the string: [netlabs #591]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://bugs6.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=591 >
Hello I am your hot lil horny toy.
I am the one you dream About,
I am a very
Heya,
We have three memory_pools: memory, string, and constant_string. Is there
any reason that string and memory are distinct? (aside from code
simplicity).
In general, is it possible that we will have other constant buffer values
besides strings.
Basically, how come we don't just have a memor
On Thu, 2002-05-16 at 16:07, Mike Lambert wrote:
> > Languages like perl can't easily be inlined, since subs may be
> > redefined at any time. If a sub's a leaf sub you can detect changes
> > before calling safely, but if it's not a leaf sub you run into the
> > potential issue of having the sub p
On Thu, 2002-05-16 at 16:13, David Whipp wrote:
> Aaron Sherman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > You might not be able to REASONABLY get a length, so you return
> > undef. In your documentation, you advise users not to take the length,
> > but just dive right in and fetch the element you want
On Thursday 16 May 2002 01:13 pm, David Whipp wrote:
> Aaron Sherman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > You might not be able to REASONABLY get a length, so you return
> > undef. In your documentation, you advise users not to take the length,
> > but just dive right in and fetch the element you
Aaron Sherman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> You might not be able to REASONABLY get a length, so you return
> undef. In your documentation, you advise users not to take the length,
> but just dive right in and fetch the element you want, e.g.:
>
> my $pi2k = @pi_digits[2000];
In this ca
> Languages like perl can't easily be inlined, since subs may be
> redefined at any time. If a sub's a leaf sub you can detect changes
> before calling safely, but if it's not a leaf sub you run into the
> potential issue of having the sub potentially redefined while you're
> in it.
If I'm in mid
On Thu, 2002-05-16 at 12:36, Miko O'Sullivan wrote:
> I submit for consideration the idea that if an array doesn't always have a
> defined length then it ceases to be that incredibly handy construct that we
> currently call "array". If arrays can answer "I dunno" when asked how long
> they are,
On Thu, 9 May 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> Anyone care to take this task on? It doesn't have to be at all fancy.
> In fact, all it needs to do is handle:
>
>*) Label offset calcs
>*) Explicit, fully-qualified, opcode names
>*) Opcode args as either labels or numbers
>
> So we'd only p
Melvin Smith:
# If we are not to put non-embed visible in config.h, we must
# pre-process parrot.h, because I need to put symbls such as
# EXP_NETWORKING somewhere.
#
# If you ever develop for Linux kernel you are familiar with
# the practice of making new major features config options
#
On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 07:38:12PM -0600, root wrote:
> #BTW, is there some standard way of creating instances
> #now?
Class::Classless and Class::Prototyped off the top of my head.
If we are not to put non-embed visible in config.h, we must
pre-process parrot.h, because I need to put symbls such as
EXP_NETWORKING somewhere.
If you ever develop for Linux kernel you are familiar with the
practice of making new major features config options
Would you like to turn on Netwo
Is CVS access for Parrot still invitation-only? If not, I would like to
request CVS access. I have posted mildly useful patches (mostly warning
fixes really) in the past; I don't think any have ever been rejected.
The CVS page at dev.perl.org/cvs implies that a maintainer (probably Dan I
guess)
SUMMARY
Arrays should always have known lengths because that's what arrays do. This
requirement is enforced culturally, not programmatically.
DETAILS
I submit for consideration the idea that if an array doesn't always have a
defined length then it ceases to be that incredibly handy construct t
On Thu, 16 May 2002, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> It's not nice. It's enough to drive people loopy, just looking at the output
> of the preprocessor, where one source line has expanded to a 10 line wrapped
> monstrosity so right in parenthesis that it couldn't be written with a dozen
> Lisp fridge mag
On Wed, 2002-05-15 at 21:38, root wrote:
>
> I've always liked how VB allowed you to define "instance methods."
> Basically a more elegant way of doing callbacks, plus allows some
> structure within your callbacks. Will Perl6 allow this (Perl5 sortof did,
> but since the "bless" way of doing t
# New Ticket Created by Joe Yates
# Please include the string: [netlabs #590]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://bugs6.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=590 >
Dear all,
In parrot code, I'm trying to print the following string:
\0
I.e. t
On Wed, 2002-05-15 at 13:02, Larry Wall wrote:
> Aaron Sherman writes:
> : Should a tied and/or lazy array be forced to present a length on demand,
> : or can length return undef on indeterminate arrays?
>
> An array implementation can return anything it jolly well pleases, but
> I'd say undef wo
I've always liked how VB allowed you to define "instance methods."
Basically a more elegant way of doing callbacks, plus allows some
structure within your callbacks. Will Perl6 allow this (Perl5 sortof did,
but since the "bless" way of doing things is going away...)
Perhaps...
class foo {..
27 matches
Mail list logo
