Josh Wilmes wrote:
Is there a way to avoid stack walking at all in miniparrot?
What do we do instead? (Nothing?)
Miniparrot's main purpose is to be able to bootstrap parrot by running its
build scripts. Leaking a little memory may be acceptable.
Disable DOD/GC, use res_lea.c (directly allo
I think this solution is the simplest... i'll go ahead and commit it.
--Josh
At 10:15 on 11/01/2002 PST, "Brent Dax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andy Dougherty:
> # At the moment, the bytecode "fingerprint" is built with
> # Digest::MD5. Alas, Digest::MD5 wasn't standard with perl
> # version
See
http://archive.develooper.com/perl6-internals@;perl.org/msg11308.html
for a closely-related discussion.
/s
On Fri, 1 Nov 2002, David Whipp wrote:
> In Perl6, everything is an object. So almost everything is
> neither a number nor a string. It probably doesn't make sense
> to cast things to
Ed Peschko writes:
> I agree with all that you said above, I'm just saying we should make typing []
> *optional*. 99% of the time, people are not going to need it, as they are not
> defining their own operators as you did above.
>
> Ed
>
>
long ago ( when xor was "!" and ^ was called h
> "ML" == Michael Lazzaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
ML>+&+|+^<<>>- bitwise (integer) operations
ML>+&= +|= +^= <<= >>=
ML>~&~|~^- charwise (string) operations
ML>~&= ~|= ~^=
i think those descriptions need to b
On Sat, Nov 02, 2002 at 02:18:44AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
snip ...
>
> in that case the vectorization is *compleatly* orthogonal to the
> details of op and we even can have something like
>
> @a ^[{ $^a > $^b ?? 1 :: ($^a,$^b) := ($^b,$^a) }] @b
>
I agree with all that you
Larry Wall <> writes:
> On Fri, Nov 01, 2002 at 11:51:17AM -0700, John Williams wrote:
> > Right. ^= is rather pointless, because = already understands list
> > context.
>
> They're not quite the same because list assignment truncates first. To wit:
>
> @a = [1,2,3];
> @b = [4,5
On Fri, Nov 01, 2002 at 12:21:43PM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
> +&+|+^<<>>- bitwise (integer) operations
> +&= +|= +^= <<= >>=
I might have missed this, but if + introduces bitwise operations,
why aren't we using it in the shift operations?
+&+|+^
Larry has been consistently using
OxAB op 0xBB
in his messages to represent a (French quote) hyperop,
(corresponding to the Unicode characters 0x00AB and 0x00BB)
which is consistent with the iso-8859-1 encoding (despite
the fact that my mailserver or his mailer insists on
labelling those messages
to me , this discussion approaches the conclusion that
^[] and v[] are *just* another operators with their own behavior
that accept as ( optional ) argument a Code reference .
to follow the beautifull philosophy of perl6 -- "A is just B" we can
say ( following Larry Wall )
...
>
On 31 Oct 2002 at 16:04, Brent Dax wrote:
> Markus Laire:
> # Emacs and vim also works on Windows, not just UNIX.
>
> So does DOS 'edit'. That doesn't mean Windows users use it. Windows
> users want tools that look and act like Windows tools--if they didn't,
> they'd be using another OS. Neith
Michael Lazzaro [mailto:mlazzaro@;cognitivity.com] wrote
> On Friday, November 1, 2002, at 01:38 PM, David Whipp wrote:
> > Presumably, there exist rules for implicit casting when
> > comparing objects of different types. If we have a rule
>
> My initial assumption is that nothing would change.
On Friday, November 1, 2002, at 01:38 PM, David Whipp wrote:
Presumably, there exist rules for implicit casting when
comparing objects of different types. If we have a rule
My initial assumption is that nothing would change. Namely, ==
compares numerically, eq compares strings, and '?' enfor
Michael Lazzaro writes:
> magical whitespace modifier:
>
>_ - When used at the end of a line or between
>statement elements, acts to "remove" whitespace
>when interpreting the statement. (Allows
>whitespace to appear without invoking any
>
David Wheeler wrote:
> On Friday, November 1, 2002, at 12:21 PM, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
>
> > ^[op] - [maybe] synonym for «op»
> > - [maybe] synonym for »op«
>
> I think that would be:
>
>`<> - synonym for «op»
>`>>op<< - synonym for »op«
>
> Unless I misunderstood Larry's po
David Wheeler [mailto:david@;wheeler.net] wrote:
> The problem with this is that you have explicitly introduced true and
> false into the language, and have therefore destroyed the utility of
> context:
>
>my boolean $bool = 0; # False.
>my $foo = ''; # False context.
>if ($
On Fri, 1 Nov 2002 12:53:41 -0500 (EST), Andy Dougherty wrote:
>At the moment, the bytecode "fingerprint" is built with Digest::MD5.
>Alas, Digest::MD5 wasn't standard with perl versions prior to 5.8.0.
>What should happen in those cases? Anybody have any good ideas?
The attached patch is a fles
On Fri, 1 Nov 2002, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
>... - synonym for ..Inf
Did I miss the report of the bistable ... operator's death?
I've looked around, but I can't seem to find it.
~ John Williams
On Fri 01 Nov, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
>
>(heredocs) - [exact format unknown; probably as perl5]
>
There are comments by Larry in Appo 2 wrt RFCs 111 and 162.
Appo 2:
===
111 aaa Here Docs Terminators (Was Whitespace and Here Docs)
162 abb Heredoc Contents
RFC 111: Here D
On Friday, November 1, 2002, at 12:21 PM, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
^[op] - [maybe] synonym for «op»
- [maybe] synonym for »op«
I think that would be:
`<> - synonym for «op»
`>>op<< - synonym for »op«
Unless I misunderstood Larry's post, in which case it might be:
`<>` - synony
On Friday, November 1, 2002, at 12:24 PM, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
So what is the "official" way to efficiently store the result of a
boolean expression, for example? If not as a "bit", then what?
If anything, I would suggest a primitive type, "bool", that has no
promoted type "Bool". It can
On Friday, November 1, 2002, at 08:02 AM, Mark J. Reed wrote:
When someone asks "what's the boolean type in Perl?" I'd rather
answer "bit" than "Perl doesn't have one", if for no other reason
than the latter answer will completely freak them out. :-)
Why? Plenty of languages get along just f
Adjusted for the most recent notes: includes «op» as the preferred (and
possibly only) spelling of "vectorize". Everything but a few hyperop
issues appears to be close to final, by my count: if/when Larry sticks
a fork() in it, it's done.
hyperoperators:
«op» - When used with any unary or
I'm probably opening up a whole new can of worms here, but if we said that the
following were both vector operators:
^ == intersection operator
v == union operator
then these could have potentially useful meanings on their *own* as set
operators, as well as modifying other operat
>> So again, I don't see the difference between the two. ^[+]= and ^+= are
>> synonyms as far as I can see, and hence no need for the first form.
> Only in the absence of overloading, and only because we've naively defined
> array ops to always do "union" rather than "intersection". If there we
On Fri, 1 Nov 2002, it was written:
> On Fri, Nov 01, 2002 at 10:35:08AM -0800, Ed Peschko wrote:
> > So again, I don't see the difference between the two. ^[+]= and ^+= are synonyms
> > as far as I can see, and hence no need for the first form.
>
> Only in the absence of overloading, and only bec
On Fri, Nov 01, 2002 at 11:51:17AM -0700, John Williams wrote:
> Right. ^= is rather pointless, because = already understands list
> context.
They're not quite the same because list assignment truncates first. To wit:
@a = [1,2,3];
@b = [4,5];
@a = @b;# @a gets [4,5]
@a ^=
On Fri, Nov 01, 2002 at 10:35:08AM -0800, Ed Peschko wrote:
> So again, I don't see the difference between the two. ^[+]= and ^+= are synonyms
> as far as I can see, and hence no need for the first form.
Only in the absence of overloading, and only because we've naively defined array
ops to always
On Fri, Nov 01, 2002 at 10:05:27AM -0700, John Williams wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Luke Palmer wrote:
>
> > > now *theres* some brackets!
> >
> > Ooh! Let's use 2AF7 and 2AF8 for qw!
>
> Actually, I wanted to suggest »German quotes« instead of French for qw.
>
> :)
Well, the other guys
--- Ed Peschko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > right, and what does this all mean? I have yet to see a good
> meaning
> > > for
> > > @array ^[+]= @array2 ...
> >
> > I think it's this:
> >
> > @a [+=] @b -> @a[x] += @b[x]
> >
> > @a [+]= @b -> @temp = @a [+] @b; a = @temp;
> >
>
> Ok, s
On Fri, 1 Nov 2002, Ed Peschko wrote:
> @a ^[+]= @b;
compared to
> @a ^+= @b;
>
> ie: they are exactly the same.
You are right, you get the same answer whether you do the hyper or the
assignment first, except in the "scalar ^op= list", in which case doing
the assignment last gets you the
On Fri, Nov 01, 2002 at 11:01:34AM -0700, John Williams wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Larry Wall wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 1 Nov 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > : does it mean that *all* postfix operators have to be "attached"
> > : without space to their operand or used with space eater modifyer
> >
Ed Peschko writes:
>
> So again, I don't see the difference between the two. ^[+]= and ^+= are synonyms
> as far as I can see, and hence no need for the first form.
>
> Ed
>
>
>
somebody before ( dont remember who)
showed how they can be different if the first argument is scalar.
a
On Fri, 1 Nov 2002 12:53:41 -0500 (EST), Andy Dougherty wrote:
>At the moment, the bytecode "fingerprint" is built with Digest::MD5.
>Alas, Digest::MD5 wasn't standard with perl versions prior to 5.8.0.
>What should happen in those cases? Anybody have any good ideas?
Something like this? (untest
> > right, and what does this all mean? I have yet to see a good meaning
> > for
> > @array ^[+]= @array2 ...
>
> I think it's this:
>
> @a [+=] @b -> @a[x] += @b[x]
>
> @a [+]= @b -> @temp = @a [+] @b; a = @temp;
>
Ok, so the '=' isn't being explicitly vectorized. So -
@a ^[+]= @
> Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
> Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 11:01:34 -0700 (MST)
> From: John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Nov 2002 18:01:34.0398 (UTC) FILETIME=[B70BCDE0:01C281D0]
> X-SMTPD: qpsmtpd/0.12
y> Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
> Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 10:39:59 -0700 (MST)
> From: John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Nov 2002 17:40:00.0029 (UTC) FILETIME=[B38AC4D0:01C281CD]
> X-SMTPD: qpsmtpd/0.12, http://develooper.
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Larry Wall wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Nov 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> : does it mean that *all* postfix operators have to be "attached"
> : without space to their operand or used with space eater modifyer
> :
> : or
> :
> : only those for which parser ( or we ) knows that they may
Andy Dougherty:
# At the moment, the bytecode "fingerprint" is built with
# Digest::MD5. Alas, Digest::MD5 wasn't standard with perl
# versions prior to 5.8.0. What should happen in those cases?
# Anybody have any good ideas?
Not sure if this qualifies as "good" :^), but we *could* package the
At the moment, the bytecode "fingerprint" is built with Digest::MD5.
Alas, Digest::MD5 wasn't standard with perl versions prior to 5.8.0.
What should happen in those cases? Anybody have any good ideas?
--
Andy Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Garrett Goebel said:
> Which stands out best?
> @a «*» @b
> @a (>*<) @b
> @a <)*(> @b
> @a >)*(< @b
> @a [>*<] @b
> @a [)*(] @b
> IMHO [>*<]
I say go with the one with the cutest name.
Garrett's choice is the bow-tie operator--not bad.
This one: (>*<) is also a pretty good bow-tie.
This
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Ed Peschko wrote:
> Michael Lazarro wrote:
>
> > 1) Need a definite syntax for hypers
> > ^[op] and <>
> > have been most seriously proposed -- something that keeps a
> > bracketed syntax, but solves ambiguity issues.
>
> hm. What was wrong with just '^' again? Reading th
On Fri, 1 Nov 2002, Josh Wilmes wrote:
>
> Is there a way to avoid stack walking at all in miniparrot?
>
> What do we do instead? (Nothing?)
Well, since I currently force all the other *ALIGNMENT #defines to be '16'
in (See comment on "Alignment problems" in
resources.c), setting ptr_alignmen
Is there a way to avoid stack walking at all in miniparrot?
What do we do instead? (Nothing?)
Miniparrot's main purpose is to be able to bootstrap parrot by running its
build scripts. Leaking a little memory may be acceptable.
--Josh
At 11:52 on 11/01/2002 EST, Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTEC
# New Ticket Created by Andy Dougherty
# Please include the string: [perl #18191]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=18191 >
When parrot is built outside of CVS, t/src/manifest.t fails with:
t/src/manifest..
# New Ticket Created by Andy Dougherty
# Please include the string: [perl #18189]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=18189 >
Not OK: This is a failure report for parrot.
When built with 'long long' INTVAL and o
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Luke Palmer wrote:
> > now *theres* some brackets!
>
> Ooh! Let's use 2AF7 and 2AF8 for qw!
Actually, I wanted to suggest »German quotes« instead of French for qw.
:)
~ John Williams
On Thursday, October 31, 2002, at 10:03 PM, John Siracusa wrote:
On 10/31/02 5:33 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Damian Conway writes:
BTW, Both Larry and I do understand the appeal of interleaving
sources and iterators. We did consider it at some length back
in January, when we spent a week thr
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Josh Wilmes wrote:
>
> I've banged together a first attempt at a miniparrot- that is, something
> that can be built on any ANSI C system without anything other than a
> compiler.
Great!
I haven't looked deeply, but there is one little quibble I found so far:
In config/au
On Fri, Nov 01, 2002 at 09:39:28AM -0600, Garrett Goebel wrote:
> In the quest for keys anyone can reach on any keyboard...
>
> instead of «*» why not: (>*<), <)*(>, >)*(<, [>*<], or [)*(]
>
> Which stands out best?
> @a «*» @b
> @a (>*<) @b
> @a <)*(> @b
> @a >)*(< @b
> @a [>*<] @b
>
On Thursday, October 31, 2002, at 10:36 PM, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
> When someone asks "what's the boolean type in Perl?" I'd rather answer
> >"bit" than "Perl doesn't have one", if for no other reason than the
> >latter answer will completely freak them out. :-)
Why? Plenty of languages get a
On Thursday, October 31, 2002, at 10:36 PM, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
So while I understand the philosophical/semantic reasons for the
absence of a true boolean type, I wonder how easy it will be to
describe the principle to newcomers, and if it's worth it. When
someone asks "what's the boolean
From: Larry Wall [mailto:larry@;wall.org]
> I was misconfigured here. My pine was marking it as UTF-8 even though
> the window was Latin-1. So you ought to be able to see this:
> @a «*» @b.
>
> I'm definitely going to look into mutt though...gotta have
> Unicode email.
In the quest for keys
--
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002 15:08:06
Brent Dax wrote:
>Erik Steven Harrison:
># All that said, can anyone come up with a case to
># confuse with <$File_Handle>?
>
>If you assume infinite lookahead, it's fine, but if not...
>
>...
>
>Is that a call to
>
> sub something() returns(IO:
On 2002-11-01 at 16:03:51, Iain 'Spoon' Truskett wrote:
> I'm not too concerned about unicode since my xterm doesn't support it
> anyway =)
XFree86 4.2.0 xterm does UTF-8 (when requested to do so via the -u8 flag).
If course, you need a Uniciode/ISO-10646 X11 font, but there are plenty of
those ar
Luke Palmer writes:
> >
> > All that said, can anyone come up with a case to
> > confuse with <$File_Handle>?
>
> sub postfix:bar returns handle;
> $y = undef ;
>
> That has two syntactically valid interpretations. It wouldn't take
> even that much to confuse the parser, thou
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> for @a -> $x, $y { ... $x is topic ... }
>
> for @a ; @b ->
> $x, $y ; $z { ... WHAT is topic ? ... }
>
> what is topic in multi stream loop ?
The first argument to the sub. Always. Unless you do 'is topic' after
a different arg. So, in the example giv
So, on the train this morning, I had a moment of Satori. What's wrong
with doing what we think of as bitwise operations using the flexops
and adding a 'bitwise' context? So, a bitwise op becomes:
bitwise ( $a | $b | $c & $d );
And the superposition will collapse in a 'mash everything together
The Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 20021027
You may have noticed that this summary is late. Um... [looks sheepish,
shuffles feet], the dog ate my homework. I did a tiny bit of
procrastination at the beginning of the week and then got totally
overtaken by events involving failed
"Clinton A. Pierce" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Most of the discussion in p6i goes right over my head, but I'm
> certainly enjoying the fruits of their labors.
Huge amounts of it go over my head too, which means I'm never *quite*
sure whether I've got the salient points in my summaries.
--
Pie
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Smylers) writes:
> In general I find backticks fairly jarring on the eyes, but they have to
> be used for _something_ ...
I think ugliness is actually a feature for vector ops. No sense having
to strap your programmers to the mast.
--
In a sense Christianity is like Jazz - if
61 matches
Mail list logo
