> Anything I'm missing? This is for *after* 0.0.11, of course. (And
> potentially after a case of really good beer, soda, or dog food is shipped
> off to Robert... :)
Of course, any of the above will help "grease the wheels". You can
also paypal to my non-computer charity of choice... http://www.
Current status as I am aware of it (please reply with updates):
* PPC JIT is somewhat busted. Not a release blocker.
* 'nmake languages' is busted on Win32. Not a release blocker, but I'd
be happy if someone skipped the failing tests when needed.
* 'make test' on Win32 -- looks like it succeeded
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Nicholas Clark wrote:
[talking about dynamically intering the debugger]
>
> Can anyone see a sane way to do it?
>
> Better still, can anyone see a viable way to do it on perl5?
Python does this. There's basically a hook after every
statement, and you can put whatever you wan
- Original Message -
From: "Leopold Toetsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Jonathan Worthington" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 5:50 PM
Subject: Re: nmake languages fails (Win32)
> Jonathan Worthington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
>
> > nmake
On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 09:00:39AM -0700, Steve Fink wrote:
> On Sep-18, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > Tinder log is at
> > http://tinderbox.perl.org/tinderbox/showlog.cgi?log=parrot/1063870180.68827.gz&fulltext=1
> >From that log:
>
> D:\Programs\Perl\bin\perl.exe -MFile::Copy=cp -e "cp q|jit/i386/j
On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 03:33:11PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> So, the sequence is:
>
> 1) Connect to the control socket
> 2) Peg parrot with SIGUSR[12]
> 3) Profit!
>
> No, wait, #3 isn't right... :)
Thinking about it, I don't see why we need #2 either
Assuming that we have the event system
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> It would be really useful to be able to attach the perl6 debugger to a
> running parrot VM, and start debugging, without having the speed hit
> up to that point of debugging. gdb and similar rely on kernel help to
> do their attaching to regular running
I was having a chat with [someone who doesn't like to be name checked] last
night and he said that the perl debugger is often useless at solving
problems. For a compiled language, one can attach gdb or similar to a
running process after it's got itself into a state, whereas with perl one
either has
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 02:24:12PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > Looking at my install here, I see I've got gcc 2.95, 3.0, 3.2, and 3.3
> > installed, with 3.3 being the default gcc. Is it worth running tinders
> > with different versions of gcc, or
On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 02:24:12PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> Looking at my install here, I see I've got gcc 2.95, 3.0, 3.2, and 3.3
> installed, with 3.3 being the default gcc. Is it worth running tinders
> with different versions of gcc, or shall I just leave things as-is and
> assume earlie
Looking at my install here, I see I've got gcc 2.95, 3.0, 3.2, and 3.3
installed, with 3.3 being the default gcc. Is it worth running tinders
with different versions of gcc, or shall I just leave things as-is and
assume earlier versions can manage to sort themselves out?
Jonathan Worthington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> nmake languages is failing because /'s rather than \'s are used in paths.
> Makefiles, e.g. like the befunge one, contain this:-
> PARROT = ../../parrot
Did you try Juergen Boemmels proposal RFT / patch?
> Jonathan
leo
Hi,
nmake languages is failing because /'s rather than \'s are used in paths.
Makefiles, e.g. like the befunge one, contain this:-
PARROT = ../../parrot
Which results under Windows in an attempt to run the .. program with the
switches /.. and /parrot.
I'm reporting it now and will look at a pat
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Steve Fink wrote:
> On Sep-19, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > I've added a third tinderbox build to my standard set--there's now a "make
> > test", "make testj", and "make languages" build going for sprite, and
> > pretty soon for glastig. (So we'll have these on x86 linux and OS
On Sep-18, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> I'm browsing through the tinderbox reports to see if we've got everything
> locked down for a release. Looks reasonably good--we've a number of Unix
> variants and Win32 building and testing green. There's a lot of nasty type
> mismatch errors under windows thoug
On Sep-19, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> I've added a third tinderbox build to my standard set--there's now a "make
> test", "make testj", and "make languages" build going for sprite, and
> pretty soon for glastig. (So we'll have these on x86 linux and OS X) The
> languages build, as you might expect,
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Steve Fink wrote:
> On Sep-19, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> > Steve Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Ok, they're "fixed".
> >
> > Not quite. Fixer fix check in ;-)
> >
> > $ parrot examples/assembly/xml_parser.pasm
> > Couldn't open small.xml # was segfault
> > $
On Sep-19, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> Steve Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Ok, they're "fixed".
>
> Not quite. Fixer fix check in ;-)
>
> $ parrot examples/assembly/xml_parser.pasm
> Couldn't open small.xml # was segfault
> $ ../../parrot uniq.pasm -c -d -u uniq.pasm# item
Sure e
On Sep-19, Peter Sinnott wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 02:10:52PM +0200, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> > On Fri 19 Sep 2003 14:05, Peter Sinnott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Hi there,
> > >
> > > Now seeming like a reasonable time I decided to
> > > take parrot for a test ride of HPUX. There seem
Peter Sinnott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> bash$ perl t/pmc/io.t
> not ok 6 - read on invalid fh should throw exception
That one is fixed already.
leo
On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 08:08:33AM -0400 it came to pass that Dan Sugalski wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Jos Visser wrote:
>
> > I came across this posting:
> >
> > Third Virtual Machine Research and Technology Symposium 2004 (VM'04)
> > May 6-7, 2004
> > San Jose Hyatt, San Jose, CA
I've added a third tinderbox build to my standard set--there's now a "make
test", "make testj", and "make languages" build going for sprite, and
pretty soon for glastig. (So we'll have these on x86 linux and OS X) The
languages build, as you might expect, is erroring out.
Anyone got any other
--- Stéphane Payrard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> With Perl6, few people will compile whole librairies but most
> will load bytecode. At this late stage there is little place for
> tunable optimization except JITting or it would defeat the
> sharing of such code between different intances of Perl
Hi there,
Now seeming like a reasonable time I decided to
take parrot for a test ride of HPUX. There seem to
be a few problems both with IO(these seem to be also happening
on linux) and objects.
bash$ perl t/pmc/io.t
1..20
Useless use of a constant in void context at t/pmc/io.t line 108.
ok 1 -
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 02:12:31PM -0700, chromatic wrote:
> On Thursday, September 18, 2003, at 12:33 PM, Gordon Henriksen wrote:
>
> >Ah, shouldn't optimization be automatic? Much preferrable to provide
> >opt-out optimizations instead of opt-in optimizations.
>
> No. That's why I tend to opt-
chromatic wrote:
> The point is not for module authors to say "no one can ever extend or
> modify this class". It's for module users to say "I'm not
> extending or modifying this class".
Ah, shouldn't optimization be automatic? Much preferrable to provide
opt-out optimizations instead of opt-i
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Andy Wardley wrote:
> chromatic wrote:
> > The thinking at the last design meeting was that you'd explicitly say
> > "Consider this class closed; I won't muck with it in this application"
> > at compile time if you need the extra optimization in a particular
> > application.
>
On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 02:10:52PM +0200, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> On Fri 19 Sep 2003 14:05, Peter Sinnott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi there,
> >
> > Now seeming like a reasonable time I decided to
> > take parrot for a test ride of HPUX. There seem to
> > be a few problems with objects.
> >
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 08:12:00AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>
> > I predict a rather large quantity of Parrot time coming up, so... :)
>
> Oooh. Do we get Exceptions Objects and Embedding then?
Core multimethod dispatch at least, with the beginning
On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 08:12:00AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> I predict a rather large quantity of Parrot time coming up, so... :)
Oooh. Do we get Exceptions Objects and Embedding then?
Nicholas Clark
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> Steve Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > cvsuser 03/09/18 23:44:57
>
> > Modified:t/pmcio.t
> > Log:
> > Maybe I'll leave this unskipped for now. If it isn't fixed by the time
> > I want to wrap up 0.0.11, I'll skip it again.
>
>
On Fri 19 Sep 2003 14:05, Peter Sinnott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> Now seeming like a reasonable time I decided to
> take parrot for a test ride of HPUX. There seem to
> be a few problems with objects.
>
> bash$ perl t/pmc/objects.t
> 1..4
> ok 1 - findclass (base class)
> not ok
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Jos Visser wrote:
> I came across this posting:
>
> Third Virtual Machine Research and Technology Symposium 2004 (VM'04)
> May 6-7, 2004
> San Jose Hyatt, San Jose, CA
>
> The VM'04 Program Committee invites you to contribute refereed papers
> a
Hi there,
Now seeming like a reasonable time I decided to
take parrot for a test ride of HPUX. There seem to
be a few problems with objects.
bash$ perl t/pmc/objects.t
1..4
ok 1 - findclass (base class)
not ok 2 - findclass (subclass)
# Failed test (t/pmc/objects.t at line 22)
# got:
Steve Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sep-18, Juergen Boemmels wrote:
>
> > Following things were done:
> > - s,/,\${slash},g
>
> Ugh. How difficult would it be to have Configure do this rewriting
> automatically? (Or rewrite to whatever it is you need, instead)? This
> just clutters up th
Steve Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> cvsuser 03/09/18 23:44:57
> Modified:t/pmcio.t
> Log:
> Maybe I'll leave this unskipped for now. If it isn't fixed by the time
> I want to wrap up 0.0.11, I'll skip it again.
I have put in throwing a real_exception for readline (only).
Steve Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> output_is(<<'CODE', <<'OUT', "string interpolation 5");
That one needed skipping too.
leo
Steve Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Because I got there a little before you did! :-) (It just needed to be
> converted to CPS)
It was CPS in my tree, but never showed up in my MANIFEST-based diff
script.
>> Fixed.
> You did? Hmm... so did I. uniq.pasm and xml_parser.pasm, at least.
> What w
Steve Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok, they're "fixed".
Not quite. Fixer fix check in ;-)
$ parrot examples/assembly/xml_parser.pasm
Couldn't open small.xml # was segfault
$ ../../parrot uniq.pasm -c -d -u uniq.pasm# item
leo
Steve Fink:
# > Following things were done:
# > - s,/,\${slash},g
#
# Ugh. How difficult would it be to have Configure do this rewriting
# automatically? (Or rewrite to whatever it is you need, instead)? This
# just clutters up the makefiles a little too much, IMO.
Well...
It's theoretically pos
40 matches
Mail list logo
