Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -{'\0', 0, 0, { } }
> +{'\0', 0, 0, { NULL } }
These changes (+ a fix for a non working --gc-debug in imcc) went in
with the parrot/imcc commandline option cleanup.
Thanks,
leo
Graham Barr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I may be missing something here. But within the resources of an object may
> be other PMCs. As those PMCs will not be referenced from anywhere else
> what is to stop the DoD run from freeing those before it freed the object ?
If the PMC has explicit knowle
Matt Fowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> All~
> To get around the problem from the last attempt, the constant
> propogation has become more conservative. It no longer propogates past
> labels...
I changed this one line slightly (there might be a function call instead
of the label and inside the
On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 11:05:34AM +0200, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> Graham Barr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I ask becasue what happens if an object actually wants
> > to use its contents during its DESTROY ?
>
> > For example Net::POP3::DESTROY will send a reset command to its
> > server if t
Graham Barr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I ask becasue what happens if an object actually wants
> to use its contents during its DESTROY ?
> For example Net::POP3::DESTROY will send a reset command to its
> server if the user did not call the quit method first. But how
> could it do this if the s
Jonathan Sillito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1. some adding and renaming in core.ops, which gives the following ops:
>- call()
>- call(in PMC)
Suboptimal. We will get a name clash in imcc. (Imcc has call as an alias
for bsr)
> 2. adds pmc access macros to register.h (as suggested by Mit
Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> No, it doesn't need a standard name. The default should be the
> "install tests" without any special envar. The developer can select
> their own set of envars to control various *longer* tests.
While a standard name is not required, having one would allow
automated CP
> "Andrew" == Andrew Savige <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andrew> Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>> All I'm asking for in my quest is to keep the "install health check"
>> tests down to a minute or two. Remember that CPAN.pm insists that
>> "make test" works before I can install.
Andrew> I agree. M
Matt Fowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> All~
> I have been playing with imcc's optimization and have a question about
> it. With -O2 we get the following results for various inputs:
All the -O2 optimizations are highly experimental and currently just a
proof of concept how to implement things,
Benjamin Goldberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>> Benjamin Goldberg wrote:
>>
>>> If a PMC was found to be reachable through a non-refcounted variable,
>>> then we set a flag saying so. At the end of DoD, every reachable
>>> refcounted value which has the first flag set, but
# New Ticket Created by Matt Fowles
# Please include the string: [perl #22558]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=22558 >
All~
To get around the problem from the last attempt, the constant
propogation has beco
# New Ticket Created by Jonathan Sillito
# Please include the string: [perl #22549]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=22549 >
This patch does:
1. some adding and renaming in core.ops, which gives the following
# New Ticket Created by Bernhard Schmalhofer
# Please include the string: [perl #22548]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=22548 >
Hi,
I'm playing around with targeting Ruby for Parrot. One of the first
things
On Tue, Jun 03, 2003 at 07:24:04PM -0400, Benjamin Goldberg wrote:
> IIRC, DoD normally happens something vaguely like this:
>
>for my $p (@all_pmcs) {
> clear_is_live_flag($p);
>}
>our $traverse;
>sub set_is_live_flag($p) {
> if( !test_is_live_flag($p) and test_is_agre
All~
I have been playing with imcc's optimization and have a question about
it. With -O2 we get the following results for various inputs:
(results 1, invariant removed from loop)
.sub _main
set I0, 5
loop:
set I1, 2
add I0, I1
lt I0, 20, l
Or not.
Folks, I know this is the perennial thread, or one of them, so before
I get too cranky, let me be kinda clear.
We aren't doing refcounting. We are continuing with the current
scheme as implemented. We're not looking to do anything to change
that scheme except perhaps implementing a gen
Yep. Imcc should definitely move out off languages into its own subdir
under the top level (Not in the top level itself).
... Who should do this? I'd be willing to help if given direction.
Moving directories around in CVS is AFAIK a PITA. The last such
operation was done in the repository di
Yep. Seems reasonable. The macros would improve readability IMHO
As long as they don't impair debugability.
(I make a reference to perl5's macros containing macros, which do
different things based on other macros, and other fun things. It's a
fine line.)
-R
Benjamin Goldberg wrote:
For more complex cases timely destruction will not be assured.
Which is not-so-good. We'd like timely destruction *always*
However, given that your suggestion can be implemented purely through
compile time behaviors, there's no reason we can't use what you've
suggested fo
Matt Fowles wrote:
>
> All~
>
> I have been following the whole GC/timely destruction thing for a
> while and have a few questions/observations.
>
> Most of the ref counting systems provide for very simple ref counting
> containers and, essentially, provide timely destruction for the simple
> ca
On Tue, 3 Jun 2003, Matt Fowles wrote:
> Most of the ref counting systems provide for very simple ref counting
> containers and, essentially, provide timely destruction for the simple
> case where a variable is not placed into some more complicated
> container. It seems to me that if we are worri
All~
I have been following the whole GC/timely destruction thing for a while
and have a few questions/observations.
Most of the ref counting systems provide for very simple ref counting
containers and, essentially, provide timely destruction for the simple
case where a variable is not placed i
After reading Leopold Toetsch's post, I'm going to simplify part of my
proposal slightly.
Benjamin Goldberg wrote:
[snip]
> To avoid premature cleanup, any time that the contents of a
> refcounted variable is assigned to a non-refcounted variable, an
> opcode to set a "reachable by non-refcounted
Miko O'Sullivan wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2 Jun 2003, Benjamin Goldberg wrote:
>
> > All values needing timely destruction would inherit from a class
> > RefCounted.
>
> I like this concept a lot, but maybe we can take it a little further
> and make it transparent to the programmer. Suppose that the
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> Benjamin Goldberg wrote:
>
>> I'd like to reiterate (and clarify) my idea, of a hybrid scheme
>> combining refcounting and DoD.
>
> I'll try to translate this to parrot speak. I hope that I fully
> understand your scheme, but lets see.
[snip]
>> During the course of a DoD
... as no one seems to cry out "No, that's wrong".
"Then" will be after a few days.
"It" is:
- #22455 test for (posix_)?memalign
- successor of #22337 (Smaller PMCs)
- a #define do move DOD related flags to pool's arenas
(which needs memalign, but if no memalign was found, it gets turned
off,
26 matches
Mail list logo
