On Tue, 2004-07-20 at 19:35, Luke Palmer wrote:
> The New Way (tm) to do that would probably be sticking a role onto the
> array object with which you're dealing:
>
> my @foo does separator('//') = (1,2,3,4,5);
> say "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"; # 1//2//3//4//5
Shh, no one's let slip the idea
Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There's a directory platforms reappeared in parrot's CVS at the top level
How that?
> Either that or the file PLATFORMS must go. But I'm not sure how CVS would
> cope with the sequencing of this.
mv PLATFORMS ARCHITECTURES #?
History isn't too importa
> There's a directory platforms reappeared in parrot's CVS at the top level
> This breaks checkouts on any case insensitive file system, because CVS
> already knows about the file PLATFORMS
> We need the repository edited to expunge the directory platforms, don't we?
> Either that or the file PLATF
Alexey Trofimenko writes:
> On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 16:06:40 -0700, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >So all of these would require curlies:
> >
> >{foo()}
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >...
>
> ah.. how poorly.. and how sufficient!.. But it's.. it's just not quite
> like in perl5.. But
On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 16:06:40 -0700, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Actually, I've been rethinking this whole mess since last week, and
am seriously considering cranking up the Ruby-o-meter here just a tad.
At the moment I'm inclined to say that the *only* interpolators in
double quotes are:
Larry wrote:
Actually, I've been rethinking this whole mess since last week, and
am seriously considering cranking up the Ruby-o-meter here just a tad.
At the moment I'm inclined to say that the *only* interpolators in
double quotes are:
\n, \t etc.
$foo
@foo[$i]
%foo{$k}
{EXPR}
On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 19:15:49 +0200, Juerd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The Perl 6 Summarizer skribis 2004-07-20 14:46 (+0100):
Another subthread discussed interpolation in strings. Larry'schanged
his mind so that "$file.ext" is now interpreted as
"$object.method". You
need to do "${file
> "LW" == Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
LW> Actually, I've been rethinking this whole mess since last week, and
LW> am seriously considering cranking up the Ruby-o-meter here just a tad.
LW> At the moment I'm inclined to say that the *only* interpolators in
LW> double quotes
On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 06:28:11PM -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote:
: > My preference is "$file\.ext". Clear, light and ascii.
:
: That's fine as far as it goes, but how do you say what, in Perl 5, I
: would use this for:
:
: "${foo}n"
:
: I like the ${} syntax, but I'm a shell guy from my earl
On Tue, 2004-07-20 at 13:15, Juerd wrote:
> The Perl 6 Summarizer skribis 2004-07-20 14:46 (+0100):
Wasn't there an actual thread to respond to for this? I always feel odd
turning the summary into a thread on what it's summarizing.
> My preference is "$file\.ext". Clear, light and ascii.
That's
There's a directory platforms reappeared in parrot's CVS at the top level
This breaks checkouts on any case insensitive file system, because CVS
already knows about the file PLATFORMS
We need the repository edited to expunge the directory platforms, don't we?
Either that or the file PLATFORMS mu
At 9:18 PM +0200 7/20/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
At 6:46 PM +0200 7/20/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
I forgot that in my proposal. Subroutine PMCs need duplication for
new threads.
That doesn't work for closures, which can be shared across threads in
a pool
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 6:46 PM +0200 7/20/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>>I forgot that in my proposal. Subroutine PMCs need duplication for
>>new threads.
> That doesn't work for closures, which can be shared across threads in
> a pool.
We don't have shared closures. We don't
Support was put in for this a while back, but I found I needed to
thump it a bit to get it working for me. The patch for it is in, and
so...
To use a system ICU, pass in the following three flags to Configure:
--icudatadir=/usr/lib/icu/2.6.1
--icushared=' -licudata -licuuc '
--icuheaders=/usr/in
Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 11:34:32AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>: So much for not changing the calling conventions. :(
> I think most of us would agree that you're allowed to break anything
> you like this week. Worry about unbreaking things after OSCON...
At 6:46 PM +0200 7/20/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
... It's desperately un-thread-safe, which is
one of the things that didn't make it out in my last reply.
Your recent words related to threads were: we don't optimize for threaded
programs. We optimize for th
At 9:43 AM -0700 7/20/04, Larry Wall wrote:
On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 11:34:32AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
: So much for not changing the calling conventions. :(
I think most of us would agree that you're allowed to break anything
you like this week. Worry about unbreaking things after OSCON...
I'm
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ... It's desperately un-thread-safe, which is
> one of the things that didn't make it out in my last reply.
Your recent words related to threads were: we don't optimize for threaded
programs. We optimize for the common case, that is single-threaded.
I fo
The Perl 6 Summarizer skribis 2004-07-20 14:46 (+0100):
> Another subthread discussed interpolation in strings. Larry's changed
> his mind so that "$file.ext" is now interpreted as "$object.method". You
> need to do "${file}.ext" or ""$( $file ).ext"". Or maybe "$«file».ext"
> by an
On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 11:34:32AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
: So much for not changing the calling conventions. :(
I think most of us would agree that you're allowed to break anything
you like this week. Worry about unbreaking things after OSCON...
Larry
Joshua Gatcomb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> incidently - things are running much slower now using
> --optimize and -j -O2
> so how much is "much slower"
> for primes2.pasm it was taking on average 2.15 real
> seconds and is now taking on average 2.9
Indeed. Strange. It ought to be faster. Jumping
At 5:56 PM +0200 7/20/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Copying 640 bytes once, or 640 bytes * 2 * nr of calls? What is
inefficient?
This *only* makes a difference for vtable functions written in
bytecode. For normal code we're already copying the frames in and o
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>Copying 640 bytes once, or 640 bytes * 2 * nr of calls? What is
>>inefficient?
> This *only* makes a difference for vtable functions written in
> bytecode. For normal code we're already copying the frames in and out
> when we make a call and there's no
Joshua Gatcomb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This was not a requirement prior to the changes I
> outlined on the 16th.
Its in config/auto/gcc.pl, which needs obviously fixing for cygwin.
leo
incidently - things are running much slower now using
--optimize and -j -O2
so how much is "much slower"
for primes2.pasm it was taking on average 2.15 real
seconds and is now taking on average 2.9
Joshua Gatcomb
a.k.a. Limbic~Region
__
Do you
At 4:59 PM +0200 7/20/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
At 10:35 AM +0200 7/20/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
And yes, this will, with sufficient call depth, result in an
all-bits-set dirty mask, which is also why we allow bytecode to
*unset* bits in the dirty fram
--- The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Okay, so the interview was on Tuesday 13th of July.
> It went well; I'm going to be a maths teacher.
"As usual, we begin with maths-geometry:
In Mathematics last week, one Pythagoras suggested there might be a
relationship between the sides
--- Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you are using gcc 3.0 or above,
> -mno-accumulate-outgoing-args must be set.
This was not a requirement prior to the changes I
outlined on the 16th.
I was at gcc version 3.3.1 but I rebuilt 3.4.1 from
source. Adding the compiler flag appears
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 10:35 AM +0200 7/20/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> And yes, this will, with sufficient call depth, result in an
> all-bits-set dirty mask, which is also why we allow bytecode to
> *unset* bits in the dirty frame marker, but only if those bits are
> set in
On Mon, 19 Jul 2004, Adrian Howard wrote:
> Wouldn't it be better to get the new T::B::T out before the new
> Test::Simple distribution? That way people can update dependencies and
> avoid test failures when the new T::S hits CPAN.
Yes, it would be. So as someone tells me that this feature is fi
At 10:35 AM +0200 7/20/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Leo, we've talked about this before. The sensible and straightforward
thing to do in a case like this is to tag in the sub pmc which
register frames are used by the sub.
And what, if the sub calls another s
Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Leo, we've talked about this before. The sensible and straightforward
>> thing to do in a case like this is to tag in the sub pmc which
>> register frames are used by the sub.
>
> And what, if the sub calls
The Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 2004-07-18
Following last week's bizarrely dated summary (I misplaced a day) we're
back with the correct week ending date, but I'm ashamed to admit that
I've slipped to writing on a Tuesday again. My head hangs in shame and I
am filled with the
On Sun, 18 Jul 2004, Andrew Shitov wrote:
> DW> my $text is TextFile("/tmp/bar");
> DW> $text = "hello"; # writes, truncates
> DW> $text ~= ", world\n"; # appends
>
> DW> $text.print "again\n"; # for old-times sake
>
> Anyhow we still need $text.flush() or $text.close() methods.
On Mon, 19 Jul 2004, Jonadab the Unsightly One wrote:
> > If I extend the natural numbers N with Inf to a new set NI (N with
> > Inf)
>
> The problem is, NI is not a group with respect to addition for any
> definition of addition of which I am aware. Translated from mathese
In other words, or m
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Leo, we've talked about this before. The sensible and straightforward
> thing to do in a case like this is to tag in the sub pmc which
> register frames are used by the sub.
And what, if the sub calls another sub?
The current pushtopp() is already an ill
(delurking)
I always wondered what that "dubious" meant.
Mike Scott
QA Software Developer
BBC News Interactive
-Original Message-
From: Michael G Schwern [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 19 July 2004 16:09
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Exit status code from Test::More might go away
37 matches
Mail list logo
