On Wed, May 28, 2003 at 04:41:36AM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
> I was reading about Haskell, and realized that I don't know what ::=
> is supposed to mean (don't ask what that has to do with Haskell :-).
> I know it's compile-time binding, but... what's compile-time binding?
>
> Could someone who k
Mitchell N Charity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Perhaps it is time to get "multiple gc regimes can coexist" working?
Sounds good, but AFAIK doesn't work - or isn't practical. I can only
imagine to have some #defines in place, to switch/test different
schemes, as currently LEA allocator.
> In add
I was reading about Haskell, and realized that I don't know what ::=
is supposed to mean (don't ask what that has to do with Haskell :-).
I know it's compile-time binding, but... what's compile-time binding?
Could someone who knows enlighten me, please?
Luke
Bryan C. Warnock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there is reason not to s/\.constant/.const/g for consistency's sake?
The difference is, that PASM did define an untyped variant:
.constant FOO 42
PIR Syntax is:
.const int FOO = 42
I'm ok with tossing the PASM variant, its barely used (only
Bill Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Am I correct in assuming that Parrot's JIT will eventually be able to produce
> directly-executable files, like .exe's?
Probably not via the JIT. The current approach (pbc2c.pl: producing a .c
source from bytecode) seems more general. This still needs some
# New Ticket Created by Simon Glover
# Please include the string: [perl #22343]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=22343 >
Currently, if you're in the debugger, and do anything that causes an
internal_excepti
On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 02:05:57PM -0700, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
> If we could think about "threads" not in terms of forkyness, but simply
> in terms of coroutines that can be called in parallel, it should be
> possible to create an implementation of "threading" that had to do a
> whole heck-of-
Quoting Michael Lazzaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Similarly, then, I would expect:
>
> sub foo(...) is threaded { ... yield() ... return() }
>
> foo(...args...)
>
> to start &foo as a new thread. C would temporarily suspend
> the thread, and C would end the thread. (Note that you could
>Small PMC (SPMC), a half sized PMC has double performance in stress.pasm
[...]
Ah, this again. :)
Perhaps it is time to get "multiple gc regimes can coexist" working?
Though having this capability is IMHO a Right Thing(tm) long-term,
I had been thinking of it as a task for a later time.
# New Ticket Created by Leopold Toetsch
# Please include the string: [perl #22337]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=22337 >
The next stage for getting faster DOD runs:
The relevant DOD flags are moved into an
10 matches
Mail list logo
