> Secondly, who do I need to convince to add the "make test" results for
PASSes too? ;-)
Perhaps Adam J. Foxson. He maintains "Test::Reporter", which makes it
very easy to submit testing results through the 'cpantest' binary.
His address is: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please include me on those, as I'm up
On 2003-07-19, Leon Brocard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've been looking at the testers database (well, downloading the list
> via nntp.perl.org really) for Module::CPANTS recently.
>
> In the current version of Module::CPANTS I report the count of PASSes
> and FAILs for each distribut
At 03:22 PM 10/11/2003 +0200, Juergen Boemmels wrote:
I just checked in the change to use the new/traditional semantics.
Furthermore i fixed some seek-errors in io_buf.
Nice. A few bugs down, a lot more to go :)
-Melvin
Applied to parrot.h, thanks.
-Melvin
At 10:15 PM 10/11/2003 +, via RT wrote:
# New Ticket Created by Michael Scott
# Please include the string: [perl #24188]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=24188 >
The file
# New Ticket Created by Michael Scott
# Please include the string: [perl #24188]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=24188 >
The file io/io_unix.c is failing to compile on OS X 10.2.6 with gcc 3.3
with the follo
Yes, you blinked and missed 0.25. I managed to put out a release that
didn't work with 5.6.1, except under the conditions with which I tested
it, so 0.25 came out rapidly to fix that.
This release adds a couple of other enhancements that were only half
implemented in 0.25.
--
Paul Johnson - [EM
Steve Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Oct-11, Melvin Smith wrote:
>>
>> set IO, P0[.BUFSIZE]
>> set P0[.BUFSIZE], 8192
> Actually, looking at that suggests that perhaps this should be done
> through the setprop/getprop interface instead, since that seems like a
> closer semantic fit to what y
On Oct-11, Melvin Smith wrote:
> At 09:19 AM 10/11/2003 -0700, Steve Fink wrote:
> >On Oct-10, Melvin Smith wrote:
> >> At 08:31 AM 10/10/2003 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> >> >
> >> >I think it's time to start thinking about it. (And I think we need a new
> >> >name, but that's because I've always
At 09:19 AM 10/11/2003 -0700, Steve Fink wrote:
On Oct-10, Melvin Smith wrote:
> At 08:31 AM 10/10/2003 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> >
> >I think it's time to start thinking about it. (And I think we need a new
> >name, but that's because I've always hated 'ioctl' :)
>
> :)
>
> I also considered io
On Oct-10, Melvin Smith wrote:
> At 08:31 AM 10/10/2003 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> >
> >I think it's time to start thinking about it. (And I think we need a new
> >name, but that's because I've always hated 'ioctl' :)
>
> :)
>
> I also considered iocmd, ioattr and ioset.
>
> IPop your favorite
At 09:59 AM 10/11/2003 +0200, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Melvin Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I personally don't like to add an opcode for every special case
> because most of them are very rarely used, but as usual its
> up for discussion.
Did you consider using the method interface in ParrotIO?
Melvin Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> That sounds proper as that is the traditional semantic for seek/lseek
> on most systems. I'm not sure why I wrote it otherwise, probably
> just in haste.
That semantic I had in mind.
I just checked in the change to use the new/traditional semantic
Bernhard Schmalhofer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> for Parrot m4, I have started on a parser for command line options.
> The idea is to port the Perl5 module Getopt::Long to PIR. Right now
> it handles only long options and the interface is still pretty nasty.
> As it might be useful for ot
# New Ticket Created by Bernhard Schmalhofer
# Please include the string: [perl #24187]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=24187 >
Hi,
for Parrot m4, I have started on a parser for command line options.
The ide
Melvin Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I personally don't like to add an opcode for every special case
> because most of them are very rarely used, but as usual its
> up for discussion.
Did you consider using the method interface in ParrotIO? That ought to
be even extensible with user code.
>
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The tinders are complaining about missing dynoplibs/Makefile.
That was missing for about half an hour, yes. I ran "make realclean",
produced the checkin script, ran it, and "realclean" was b0rken :)
> Dan
leo
Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Not sure how to solve this short of changing directory.
Seem that we need ten extra lines with explicit rules.
> Nicholas Clark
leo
Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 05:44:05PM +0200, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>> >> - the opcode numbers are assigned dynamically:
> What happens if the opcode library is rebuilt with more ops after the
> bytecode using it is compiled and frozen to disk?
Its as inva
Adam Thomason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here's the beginning of support for debugging the JIT core with the
> native compiler on AIX. This patch implements a replacement for
> jit_debug.c that emits XCOFF-compatible stabs in order to placate the
> AIX assembler.
I don't know if you get hit by
Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I infer that you are not hitting the TOUCH in imcc's Makefile:
I built parrot configured with and w/o --maintainer Configure option, so
I should have touched it.
But anyway, you sayed, that after your proposed change, some include
files are not found.
I've committed the beginnings of networking support, at least for the UNIX
side of the house. If people want to play with it, edit io/io_private.h
and set PARROT_NET_DEVEL to 1 before doing the remake. I didn't
want to turn it on by default because I only have Linux and Solaris
here.
Also I added i
21 matches
Mail list logo
