Here is a new variant of File Spec for the Parrot internals.
I've changed implementation. Made some alternations concerning
with function names. catdir and catfile have become concat_dirnames
and append_filename respectively. Now it will work properly
on Windows, UNIX, VMS, Mac, cygwin, and OS/2(?)
- Forwarded message from Jarkko Hietaniemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
From: Jarkko Hietaniemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 08:45:45 +0300
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: this might amuse you
http://gimp-savvy.com/cgi-bin/img.cgi?ailspyUiCq0ElDc23
--
Jarkko Hietaniemi <[EMAIL PRO
On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 07:18:53AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The AUTHOR INTENDED IT TO and so it is not a bug. If you don't believe me
> and you want to ignore Michael's previous mail on it then look at the
> source code where you will see
>
> if( UNIVERSAL::isa($e1, 'ARRAY') a
On Tue, Sep 09, 2003 at 09:26:23AM -0700, Ovid wrote:
> This is fine:
>
> isa_ok($str2, ref $str1, '... and the object');
>
> This is (almost) not fine:
>
> is($str2, $str1, '... and the strings are equal');
>
> However, the latter (and is_deeply()) should work *If and Only If* that
> comp
On Tue, Sep 09, 2003 at 08:39:21PM +0200, Tels wrote:
> Real world example: [*]
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~> perl -MTest::More -MMath::String -wle 'plan tests => 1; $a =
> Math::String->new("abc"); $b = $a->copy()->bneg(); ok $a,$b; print "$a != $b
> (", $a->as_number(), " != ", $b->as_number(),")";
Since I have about 1000 messages in my inbox and half of them seem to be
about is_deeply() and overloading and I got tired of watching Tony and
Fergal talk past each other, here's how its going to be.
Documented or not is_deeply() and is() should treat string and numeric
overloaded objects as n
Arthur Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> I am adding an additional pmc (Perl5LV), however a test fails
> t/pmc/pmc...NOK 75# Failed test (t/pmc/pmc.t at line 1650)
> # got: 'Perl5LV PMCs have incorrect name ""
> # '
> # expected: 'All names and ids ok.
> # '
> t/
On Wednesday, September 10, 2003, at 05:40 pm, Brent Dax wrote:
Got something a bit better.
Parrot Configure has had syntax for modifying settings without removing
them for a long time:
:add{foo}
:rem{foo}
Until now, it only worked when Configure prompted you interactively for
th
Arthur Bergman:
# Currently if you specify cc and ld flag options at the command line it
# totally overrides the ones it finds, this seems non DWIM and non
# optimal. This little patch fixes it.
Got something a bit better.
Parrot Configure has had syntax for modifying settings without removing
th
Hi,
I am adding an additional pmc (Perl5LV), however a test fails
t/pmc/pmc...NOK 75# Failed test (t/pmc/pmc.t at line 1650)
# got: 'Perl5LV PMCs have incorrect name ""
# '
# expected: 'All names and ids ok.
# '
t/pmc/pmc...ok 91/91# Looks like you failed 1 tests
Tony Bowden wrote:
> The author's intent is entirely irrelevant to whether or not something
> is a bug.
Wow. I had 2 possible responses in mind, this one was not on my radar at
all. That was top left corner in the last second of extra time but we
appear to be playing on 2 different pitches.
_enti
> > Anyway, we're more than happy to do this once in a while.. We just
> > require detailed instructions as to what goes where.
> Dan does (again :) disagree, and wants files in $ROOT - but
I'll let you two hash it out. Your reasons sound logical and sensible
to me. Clogging up the $ROOT is pr
Currently if you specify cc and ld flag options at the command line it
totally overrides the ones it finds, this seems non DWIM and non
optimal. This little patch fixes it.
Reason I need this is am moving in pmcs into classes that #include
perl.h and thus need patch/to/perl.h in -I
Arthur
---
On Tue, 9 Sep 2003, Luke Palmer wrote:
> Okay, after some major changes, here's the second revision of my patch.
> This one is fully functional.
>
> On my system, it creates over a 10x speedup for lazy DOD runs!
What's it do for non-lazy runs?
> (I'll post the benchmark program if someone wants
On Tue, 9 Sep 2003, Gordon Henriksen wrote:
> Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 9 Sep 2003, Gordon Henriksen wrote:
> >
> > > Random thought
> > >
> > > There's some discussion on perl-qa right now about how Test::More
> > > should implement "is_deeply", which executes a
On Tue, Sep 09, 2003 at 08:50:06PM +0100, Fergal Daly wrote:
> It says it looks inside listrefs and hashrefs. That's all.
> Objects are not listrefs and hashrefs. They are sometimes made *from*
> such, but they are not such.
I think many people would disagree with you here but that's irrelevant
Robert Spier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The method described below is generally what we do. Not perfect, but
> better than nothing, or just straight removals.
> Anyway, we're more than happy to do this once in a while.. We just
> require detailed instructions as to what goes where.
I'm for a
On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 07:18:53AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > The fact the is_deeply currently looks inside them is a bug.
> The AUTHOR INTENDED IT TO and so it is not a bug.
The author's intent is entirely irrelevant to whether or not something
is a bug.
> and you want to ignore Michae
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Okay, after some major changes, here's the second revision of my patch.
> This one is fully functional.
> On my system, it creates over a 10x speedup for lazy DOD runs!
We need that!!!1
> (I'll post the benchmark program if someone wants; it's pretty long
> On Tue, 9 Sep 2003 14:40:09 -0400, "Gordon Henriksen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
GH> Fergal Daly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Tuesday 09 September 2003 19:27, Gordon Henriksen wrote:
>>
>> > Isn't the easiest way to get a recursive-and-exact object graph
>> > match to simply use an exist
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Sep 2003, Gordon Henriksen wrote:
>
> > Random thought
> >
> > There's some discussion on perl-qa right now about how Test::More
> > should implement "is_deeply", which executes a code block and tests
> > that the return value is equivalent
On Tue, 9 Sep 2003, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
>
> This is mostly just a gratuitous message so that Piers has something
> to talk about in the next summary ;-), but when's the next
> Apocalypse due out?
Well, I don't know if Leon (Hi Piers!) has better information than I do,
but the short answer
On Tue, Sep 09, 2003 at 08:50:06PM +0100, Fergal Daly wrote:
> The docs for is() says it uses eq, is_deeply() says it looks inside, it
> doesn't say "looks inside sometimes".
It says it looks inside listrefs and hashrefs. That's all.
Objects are not listrefs and hashrefs. They are sometimes mad
Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> This is mostly just a gratuitous message so that Piers has something
> to talk about in the next summary
I bet Leon has something to say about that.
> Better would be "We're working on X and have hashed out the details
> of Y but are having problems with Z"
Somethi
24 matches
Mail list logo
