I reran the tests on an x86 box. I had to killall parrot three times
and one test killed itself from memory exhaustion. Is it just a
coincidence that all the platforms with jit are failing these tests?
The failures in t/tcl_glob are particularly interesting. The first
failure I did a `killall p
# New Ticket Created by Andy Dougherty
# Please include the string: [perl #37160]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=37160 >
This patch makes it easier to compile parrot with a compiler other than
the one used
On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 08:58:49AM -0400, Matt Diephouse wrote:
> Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Also, is rx.ops obsolete? PGE seems to be the new solution. If so, can
> > > we get rid of rx.ops? Or is rx.ops still going to be used for
> > > something?
> >
> > rx_ opcodes are bro
# New Ticket Created by jerry gay
# Please include the string: [perl #37158]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=37158 >
the linker is failing to build ParTcl with MSVC, due to unresolved
external symbols. i'm s
> Until something better comes along I have installed tinderbox2
> on a uml machine I have. Feel free to point any available tinderclients
> at it.
> URL - http://unlinked.vm.bytemark.co.uk/tinder/index.html
> Email - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Peter
The relevant perl6internals threads w
Can you repost directions/configs, etc?
Thanks!
On Sep 13, 2005, at 2:59 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The tinderbox I setup about 6 months ago probably/possibly still
works.
If anyone is interesting in running a few tinderclients feel free
to do so.
Thanks
Peter
-Original Message
The tinderbox I setup about 6 months ago probably/possibly still works.
If anyone is interesting in running a few tinderclients feel free to do so.
Thanks
Peter
-Original Message-
From: Will Coleda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Internals List
Sent: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 16:54:17 -0400
Subj
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, Matt Diephouse wrote:
> Will Coleda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Leo mentions on IRC that some tests are failing on i386 and OSX 10.3
> > (10.2?). I'm passing 100% on OSX 10.4.
> >
> > Can we get some test results on other various platforms? (Do we have
> > a tinderbox agai
Will Coleda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Leo mentions on IRC that some tests are failing on i386 and OSX 10.3
> (10.2?). I'm passing 100% on OSX 10.4.
>
> Can we get some test results on other various platforms? (Do we have
> a tinderbox again yet?)
Not so good here either:
Failed Test Stat
Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Also, is rx.ops obsolete? PGE seems to be the new solution. If so, can
> > we get rid of rx.ops? Or is rx.ops still going to be used for
> > something?
>
> rx_ opcodes are broken for several reasons: they are non-reentrant due
> to the usage of IntSta
Not so great on this end.
Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed
---
t/cmd_array.t 4 1024454 8.89% 27-30
t/cmd_break.t 2 512 22 100.00% 1-2
t/cmd_continue.t2
On 12 Sep 2005, at 19:27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-help
That's a bit spooky, are you a prisoner in a Swiss bank?
# New Ticket Created by Joshua Hoblitt
# Please include the string: [perl #37155]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=37155 >
Building with revision r9190 I get the following warning.
--
config/gen/platform/gen
--
On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 04:54:17PM -0400, Will Coleda wrote:
> Leo mentions on IRC that some tests are failing on i386 and OSX 10.3
> (10.2?). I'm passing 100% on OSX 10.4.
>
> Can we get some test results on other various platforms? (Do we have
> a tinderbox again yet?)
Tested with r9190.
# New Ticket Created by Amos Robinson
# Please include the string: [perl #37151]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=37151 >
Need to either change PGE::Glob to fit Tcl style, /or/ create a derived
one just for
Joshua Hoblitt wrote:
Is it just me or is it b0rked to have a file named src/parrot.c that
does nothing while the entry point for the parrot executable lives in
imcc/main.c?
Around 2 years ago test_main.c was Parrot's main and imcc was a
standalone PIR->PASM translator. With the integration of
Matt Diephouse wrote:
AFAICT, there's currently no support for:
- Lexical/anonymous classes
- Submethods
Yep.
Also, is rx.ops obsolete? PGE seems to be the new solution. If so, can
we get rid of rx.ops? Or is rx.ops still going to be used for
something?
rx_ opcodes are broken for seve
chromatic wrote:
Hi all,
In a recent discussion with Chip and Leo, the idea came up to ask for a
list of very specific TODO items -- specifically things that should work
but don't.
Some of the items in this thread are TODOs, some bugs, and some could be
noops. I'll try to classify items in
lol
apologies, and oh dear... i was trying to find out the commands for the mail
engine
-Original Message-
From: Sam Phillips [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 12 September 2005 22:55
To: Banks, Alex
Cc: perl6-internals@perl.org
Subject: Re: -help
On 12 Sep 2005, at 19:27, [EMAIL PROTEC
19 matches
Mail list logo
