Matt Kennedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The BigInt PMC breaks parrot when building without GMP support
Oops.
Thanks, applied.
leo
Matt Kennedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The attached env.patch patches classes/env.pmc to add vtable methods
> elements() and get_iter() and modifies get_string_keyed() to also
> accept integer keys so that it is possible to use an Iterator on the
> environment.
Looks good.
> ... The patch use
On Wed, Jul 07, 2004 at 11:50:16PM -0400, JOSEPH RYAN wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wednesday, July 7, 2004 11:25 pm
> Subject: Re: push with lazy lists
>
> > On Fri, Jul 02, 2004 at 09:32:07PM -0500, Dan
> Hursh wrote:
> > : how 'bout
>
- Original Message -
From: Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, July 7, 2004 11:25 pm
Subject: Re: push with lazy lists
> On Fri, Jul 02, 2004 at 09:32:07PM -0500, Dan
Hursh wrote:
> : how 'bout
> :
> : @x = gather{
> : loop{
> : take time
> : }
> : } # can
On Fri, Jul 02, 2004 at 03:03:49PM -0400, JOSEPH RYAN wrote:
: Sure. The parser won't care what kind of characters
: make up the operator, as long as its defined by the
: time the operator is encountered. The "operator"
: rules in the grammar will probably be as simple as this:
:
: # where x is
On Fri, Jul 02, 2004 at 09:32:07PM -0500, Dan Hursh wrote:
: how 'bout
:
: @x = gather{
: loop{
: take time
: }
: } # can this be @x = gather { take time loop }
: push @x, "later";
: say pop @x;# "later"
Can probably be made to work right.
: say pop @x;# heat death?
Ye
On Wed, Jul 07, 2004 at 08:09:51PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: On Tue, Jun 29, 2004 at 10:52:34AM -0500, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
: : On Tue, Jun 29, 2004 at 08:34:16AM -0700, Austin Hastings wrote:
: : > This has no direct bearing on p6l, since performance is a p6i issue.
: : > But perhaps in the
On Tue, Jun 29, 2004 at 10:52:34AM -0500, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
: On Tue, Jun 29, 2004 at 08:34:16AM -0700, Austin Hastings wrote:
: > This has no direct bearing on p6l, since performance is a p6i issue.
: > But perhaps in the interests of performance as well as hackery we
: > should explicitl
On Tue, Jul 06, 2004 at 07:41:22PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
: Considering that:
:
: $obj.meth "foo";
:
: No longer needs parentheses, and that argument processing is done on the
: callee rather than the caller side (well, most of the time), do I still
: have to predeclare C if I want to say:
The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Different OO models
> Jonadab the Unsightly One had wondered about having objects
> inheriting behaviour from objects rather than classes in Perl 6.
Urgle. I've completely failed to explain myself so as to be
understood. That wasn't
On Wed, 2004-07-07 at 17:07, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
> Interesting. Aside: I'm glad to have it, as the whole plan business
> was one of the turn-offs of the standard Test modules in the past. Is
> the tedium of counting tests really worth it for anyone?
Tedium is the mother of invention.
Add no
On Wed, Jul 07, 2004 at 05:46:12PM -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> I think I threw that in before I realized one could just do:
>
> =for testing
> use Test::More 'no_plan';
>
> This was all very early on in my mucking with the Test:: modules. In fact,
> no_plan was implemented specificly so I
# New Ticket Created by Matt Kennedy
# Please include the string: [perl #30630]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org:80/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=30630 >
This patch was done against parrot_2004-07-07_070001.
bigint.patch affects classes/b
# New Ticket Created by Matt Kennedy
# Please include the string: [perl #30631]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org:80/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=30631 >
The attached env.patch patches classes/env.pmc to add vtable methods
elements() and g
On Wed, Jul 07, 2004 at 05:18:44PM -0400, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
> > pod2test is poorly architected but I don't see anything it does that
> > I'd want in a module. What were you thinking of?
>
> I was mostly thinking about the capturing of STDOUT and STDERR, but I'm
> alsa suggesting it as a gener
On Wed, Jul 07, 2004 at 02:42:22PM -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 04, 2004 at 10:18:37PM -0400, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
> > I started using Test::Inline, and I have two related comments. (I hope
> > this is the right place to bring them up.)
> >
> > 1. I don't think that pod2test sh
On Fri, Jun 04, 2004 at 10:18:37PM -0400, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
> I started using Test::Inline, and I have two related comments. (I hope
> this is the right place to bring them up.)
>
> 1. I don't think that pod2test should do anything more than the minimum
> to construct a valid test script
Well, it's wednesday, so this must be... the day my laptop goes in for
repair. *Again*, dammit. (For those of you keeping track at home, this is
the fourth time in a month)
Standard rules apply--I've got limited e-mail access, and no non-work
computer access to speak of. (Plus I may well leave for
On Tue, May 25, 2004 at 09:16:51AM -0700, chromatic wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-05-25 at 06:58, Francisco Olarte Sanz wrote:
>
> > I've been looking at the documentation for the test modules (Test::More,
> > Test::Simple, Test::Builder ), and I've found nothing regarding the return
> > value of the
On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 02:55:34PM +1000, Andrew Savige wrote:
> Suppose I fix a bug with a unique bug ID in a bug tracking system.
> I start by dutifully adding 15 new asserts, say, to an existing unit
> test program, to duplicate the bug before I fix it. What if I later
> want some way to map the
--- Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> . . . .
> Of the qualities you listed for Pumpking:
>
> "Look, I already told you! I deal with the goddamn customers so the
> engineers don't have to! I have people skills! I am good at dealing
> with people! Can't you understand that? What the hell
David Storrs writes:
> On Tue, Jul 06, 2004 at 06:39:07PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
> > Matija Papec writes:
> > >
> > > Would there be a way to still use simple unquoted hash keys like in old
> > > days ($hash{MYKEY})?
> >
> > Of course there's a way to do it. This is one of those decisions th
On Tue, Jul 06, 2004 at 06:39:07PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
> Matija Papec writes:
> >
> > Would there be a way to still use simple unquoted hash keys like in old
> > days ($hash{MYKEY})?
>
> Of course there's a way to do it. This is one of those decisions that I
> was against for the longest
23 matches
Mail list logo
