Re: [POC] nci interface using ffcall library

2005-10-30 Thread John Lenz
On Fri, October 28, 2005 2:22 pm, Nick Glencross said: > Guys, > > As mentioned on the list yesterday I started evaluating ffcall as a way > of providing NCI functionality. > > http://www.haible.de/bruno/packages-ffcall.html I am a SWIG (www.swig.org) developer, and I recently started looking at

Re: Configure System (was Re: [TODO] --nomanicheck fibs)

2005-10-30 Thread Joshua Hoblitt
On Sun, Oct 30, 2005 at 09:13:31PM -, Jonathan Worthington wrote: > One would certainly hope so. :-) I guess this approach can work if the > code produced by the Perl 5 compiler only contains the subset of Parrot > functionality that MiniParrot can handle. The constraint can be pushed high

Re: Why submethods

2005-10-30 Thread Sam Vilain
On Sat, 2005-10-29 at 17:30 -0400, Stevan Little wrote: > However, it could also be that the creator of Foo did not intend for > subclasses to be able to "Just Work", and that the whole idea of Foo > is to do a "Template Method" style pattern in which subclasses must > implement the &help_pro

Re: [perl #37545] [BUG] pbc_merge, tcl, subdirectories:

2005-10-30 Thread Will Coleda
On Oct 30, 2005, at 4:06 PM, Jonathan Worthington wrote: "Leopold Toetsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Oct 27, 2005, at 7:27, Will Coleda (via RT) wrote: But if I try this from languages/tcl, I get: ../../parrot -o foo.pbc foo.pir ../../parrot -o bar.pbc bar.pir ../../pbc_merge -o whee.

Re: Why submethods

2005-10-30 Thread Uri Guttman
> "DC" == Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: DC> But factoring method implementations out into a subroutines is DC> also extremely annoying, because a subroutine doesn't provide the DC> internal conveniences that a method does. In particular, it DC> doesn't have an invocant and

Re: [perl #37569] Compiler Warnings Patch

2005-10-30 Thread Jonathan Worthington
"Kevin Tew (via RT)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Compiler Warnings Patch Thanks, applied (r9659). Jonathan

Re: Configure System (was Re: [TODO] --nomanicheck fibs)

2005-10-30 Thread Jonathan Worthington
"Joshua Hoblitt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 11:49:33PM +0100, Jonathan Worthington wrote: > If people have free time to spend on configure stuff, might it not be > better spent working on the real configure system that we want to have > (e.g. a set of makefiles for each pl

Re: [perl #37545] [BUG] pbc_merge, tcl, subdirectories:

2005-10-30 Thread Jonathan Worthington
"Leopold Toetsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Oct 27, 2005, at 7:27, Will Coleda (via RT) wrote: But if I try this from languages/tcl, I get: ../../parrot -o foo.pbc foo.pir ../../parrot -o bar.pbc bar.pir ../../pbc_merge -o whee.pbc foo.pbc bar.pbc Couldn't load 'tcl_group': unknown reason

Re: Determining number of return values expected

2005-10-30 Thread Jonathan Worthington
"Leopold Toetsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Oct 24, 2005, at 0:07, Jonathan Worthington wrote: "Leopold Toetsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: op result_count(out INT)# TODO or some such I'm guessing TODO means "it's not done yet"? But I was wondering, would a more general soluti

[perl #37569] Compiler Warnings Patch

2005-10-30 Thread via RT
# New Ticket Created by Kevin Tew # Please include the string: [perl #37569] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=37569 > Compiler Warnings Patch Index: src/dod.c =

Re: [POC] nci interface using ffcall library - updated

2005-10-30 Thread Nick Glencross
Nick Glencross wrote: Guys, As mentioned on the list yesterday I started evaluating ffcall as a way of providing NCI functionality. Ok, here's an updated version with (hopefully) working callbacks -- at least enough for a POC. If you tried out my previous version, run 'rm */*ffcall*' befo

[svn ci] Variable-sized reg frames 14 - r9645

2005-10-30 Thread Leopold Toetsch
I've committed the next major step of switching to variable-sized register frames. Actually now almost all[1] register frames are variable-sized. It still needs more cleanup, but the basics are working now. There are still some NUM_REGISTERS around and the register allocator doesn't yet use mo

Re: Passing arguments to parrot from C

2005-10-30 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Nick Glencross wrote: Hmmm. still don't think that's what I want. Obviously this is in the context of the NCI callback stuff that I'm looking into -- no surprises there. Ah callbacks again. As these are called by C code, you really should not a function signature at compile-time. In case 2

[perl #37563] [BUG] Parrot m4 has problems with PGE

2005-10-30 Thread via RT
# New Ticket Created by Bernhard Schmalhofer # Please include the string: [perl #37563] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=37563 > Hi, it looks like recent PGE changes broke 'Parrot m4'. I have boiled it down

Re: Passing arguments to parrot from C

2005-10-30 Thread Nick Glencross
Leopold Toetsch wrote: On Oct 30, 2005, at 1:54, Nick Glencross wrote: Quick question... I've been looking through inter_run and extend to see how to pass arguments to a parrot method/function from C, but all the prototypes that I've seen have '...' or 'va_list' to accept the arguments.

Re: Passing arguments to parrot from C

2005-10-30 Thread Leopold Toetsch
On Oct 30, 2005, at 1:54, Nick Glencross wrote: Quick question... I've been looking through inter_run and extend to see how to pass arguments to a parrot method/function from C, but all the prototypes that I've seen have '...' or 'va_list' to accept the arguments. If I don't know what the