Tom Hughes wrote:
>>#17578
> Applied.
First of all, thank you for comitting these. I hate 3-way rediff's ;-)
>>#17193 necessary for imcc to write out PBC
> Applied. Like you I don't like it much but there aren't any other
> obviously better ways.
Yes, seems so.
> I missed that when it
> #17517 build system, permanent Configure runs - annoying at least
I wish someone would commit this one as this does fix a very annoying
problem, especially on cygwin.
Tanton
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What Solaris's qsort ended up doing was walking off the front of the
> reglist[] array, effectively trying to sort reglist[-1], which, of
> course, didn't exist. (*Why* it did that is a bit of a mystery; I'd hav
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> #17578 imcc including all fixes sent to the list except todays fix
>by Andy.
> - actually the 3rd fix summary IIRC I sent in (s. there for a list of
>patches, which are obsolete)
> - CRUCIAL for non i386
On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 11:54:06PM -0600, John Williams wrote:
> After testing various cases of x, I came up with one that I cannot
> explain. Can someone tell me what is happening here (in perl5)?
>
> $ perl -le 'print "@{[ $a = ('a','b') x 3 ]}"; print $a'
> a bbb
> bbb
>
> or in other words
or who applies what when and why or not? This questions arises
sometimes, so I'll ask.
Here is a list of current open patches in decreasing priority:
#17578 imcc including all fixes sent to the list except todays fix
by Andy.
- actually the 3rd fix summary IIRC I sent in (s. there for a
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> The current pad_stack handling is very much tied to Sub.pmc. The only
> way of getting the current scope is creation of a new sub; the only
> way setting the current pad is invoking this sub.
>
> But I didn't use
As already announced, I used the memory allocator from
http://gee.cs.oswego.edu/dl/html/malloc.html and tossed the collect system.
Description of changes:
- DOD is the same incl, stack_walk and so on
- resources.c is gone, no copying of memory, no string tails ...
- dead objects are free'd, the
On Wed, 25 Sep 2002, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> This patch obsoletes all previous imcc 0.0.9 patches and contains all
> current fixes and improvements.
> I suppose, problems Andy has, to be related with the parser.
Actually, the core dump I got in reg_sort_f turned out to be a simple bug
in re
On Tue, 2002-09-24 at 17:27, John Williams wrote:
> If I understand our non-conclusions so far, we're waiting for Larry to
> clarify:
>
> 1) how to create a 1-tuple/1-item list?
>
> 2) how to interpret the flattened list context? e.g. given this:
>
> > $x = (1,2,3);
> > @y = (
[cc'd to perl6-internals]
"Jonathan Sillito" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> If I remember correctly Sean's patch did store the scratchpad with the
> Sub.pmc, except that I retreived it from the current context's pad_stack.
> Then when Sub.pmc was invoked it pushed the correct pad on the st
From: Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [snip]
Luke, thanks and congratulations on a well written case. You put into
words exactly what I was trying to put into words myself. Now I don't have
to finish this ugly draft I have lying around.
-Miko
--
The Perl 6 Summary for the Week Ending 20020822
So, another week, another Perl 6 summary. Let's see if I can get through
this one without calling Tim Bunce 'Tim Bunch' shall we? Or maybe I
should leave a couple of deliberate errors in as a less than cunning
ploy to get more feedbac
Luke Palmer wrote at Wed, 25 Sep 2002 00:09:41 +0200:
Very good written text.
> =head1 DESCRIPTION
>
> Because of the addition of the flattening operator, parentheses in Perl 6,
> when used as list constructors, are entirely redundant with brackets.
> Additionally, parentheses have one incons
14 matches
Mail list logo
