Thanks to everyone, particularly rafl, for getting shared libraries
in. I hope that it hasn't been too painful, and that we get support
for most platforms.
Here's a patch which provides initial support for Darwin. I've only
just got a Mac, so am learning as I go along (e.g.
http://fink.sourceforge
This patch fixes two find_exception_handler bugs, and identifies a
third, all related to executing pushaction subs:
1. It is necessary to wait until after popping the action before
calling it, lest the signalling of another error during action execution
causes you to lose, and lose, and los
Luke Palmer wrote:
> Of course, this was introduced for a reason:
>
> sub min($x,$y) {
> $x <= $y ?? $x !! $y
> }
> sub min2($x, $y) {
> if $x <= $y { return $x }
> if $x > $y { return $y }
> }
>
> In the presence of junctions, these two functions are not equ
Larry Wall wrote:
: -
: Num : : Base Numeric type
: Int : :
: Float : :
: Complex : :
This bothers me. The reason we put in Num in the first pla
The PIR syntax.pod file says that nested namespaces can be used by
separating namespaces with a semicolon, ala nested array/hash
structures. But the common writing convention seems to be along the
lines of perl5 packages with a double colon to separate. After looking
at the "find_global Foo::
On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 11:58:38PM -0800, Jonathan Lang wrote:
: I think there might be a discrepency between S3 and S4.
You are correct--S4 was out of date. Thanks.
Larry
HaloO,
Luke Palmer wrote:
But junctions are so "special", that this abstraction wouldn't work.
Well my point is that I dought that it is tractible for the compiler
to come up with the dwimmery to pull the invocation of .values on the
return value out of toomany and leave the cardinality check
On 1/4/06, Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> t/run/optionsok 2/10Can't locate object method
> "new" via package "File::Temp" at t/run/options.t line 78.
> # Looks like you planned 10 tests but only ran 2.
> # Looks like your test died just after 2.
> t/run/options
HaloO,
Rob Kinyon wrote:
I'm confused at the confusion. To me, junctions are just magical
values, not magical scalars. In theory, one should be able to create
junctions of arrays, hashes, or subs just as easily.
my @junc = any( @a, @b, @c );
my %junc = any( %a, %b, %c );
Hmm, and this
On 1/4/06, Rob Kinyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Luke Palmer wrote:
> > The point was that you should know when you're passing a named
> > argument, always. Objects that behave specially when passed to a
> > function prevent the ability to abstract uniformly using functions.[1]
> > ...
> > [1] T
t/run/optionsok 2/10Can't locate object method
"new" via package "File::Temp" at t/run/options.t line 78.
# Looks like you planned 10 tests but only ran 2.
# Looks like your test died just after 2.
t/run/optionsdubious
Test returned status 2
On 1/2/06, TSa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> HaloO,
>
> Luke Palmer wrote:
> > The point was that you should know when you're passing a named
> > argument, always. Objects that behave specially when passed to a
> > function prevent the ability to abstract uniformly using functions.[1]
> > ...
> > [
On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 07:34:41PM -0500, Stevan Little wrote:
: Hello again,
:
: Chip pointed out to me that my post was severely mangaled because it
: was too wide, so I have reformatted to fit within 70 columns, hope
: this works better.
:
: NOTE: I realize that this format may be entirely
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jonathan Lang wrote:
Instead of
multi sub *infix:<~>(ArabicStr $s1, ArabicStr $s2) {...}
multi sub *infix:<~>(Str $s1, ArabicStr $s2) {...}
multi sub *infix:<~>(ArabicStr $s1, Str $s2) {...}
as S13 say
multi sub infix:<+> (Us $us, Them $them) is c
jerry gay wrote:
i'd like reports from a third compiler/arch to know how it should
behave... enabled by default, or disabled. so far, we have:
gcc - disabled
It's not that easy and depends on a lot of factors (available mem is a
major issue). Then there are some brpken gcc versions around. An
On 1/4/06, Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And, just to be clear, that's building with
> Configure.pl --optimize=???
> (that is, exactly what optimization flags did you use?)
>
configure.pl --optimize
(which means i used perl's optimize flags: -MD -Zi -DNDEBUG -O1)
~jerry
Jonathan Lang wrote:
Instead of
multi sub *infix:<~>(ArabicStr $s1, ArabicStr $s2) {...}
multi sub *infix:<~>(Str $s1, ArabicStr $s2) {...}
multi sub *infix:<~>(ArabicStr $s1, Str $s2) {...}
as S13 say
multi sub infix:<+> (Us $us, Them $them) is commutative {
myadd($us,$them
On Wed, 4 Jan 2006, jerry gay via RT wrote:
> On 1/4/06, Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, 4 Jan 2006, Joshua Hoblitt via RT wrote:
> > > I'm wondering if it's worth disabling optimizations for
> > > those compilation units if nobody noticed a problem in the period
On 1/4/06, Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jan 2006, Joshua Hoblitt via RT wrote:
> > I'm wondering if it's worth disabling optimizations for
> > those compilation units if nobody noticed a problem in the period
> > between the tree reorganization and the breakage
On Wed, 4 Jan 2006, Joshua Hoblitt via RT wrote:
> Andy,
>
> Were you caught by either "takes too long" or "Overwhelms some
> compilers."?
Well, it hadn't quite overwhelmed the compiler yet -- it was swapping like
mad for at least 20 minutes and still growing, and several other processes
(incl
Hi,
As you know, I'm currently busy writing a paper on the architecture of
Parrot, and during my attempt to describe the exception sub-system,
something came to mind. I'm not sure if the event system is fully
operational (I thought it was already implemented), but I do know the
plan was to che
Klaas-Jan Stol wrote:
Hi,
As you know, I'm currently busy writing a paper on the architecture of
Parrot, and during my attempt to describe the exception sub-system,
something came to mind. I'm not sure if the event system is fully
operational (I thought it was already implemented),...
The im
HaloO,
Luke Palmer wrote:
Junctions are frightfully more abstract than that. They only take on
meaning when you evaluate them in boolean context. Before that, they
represent only a potential to become a boolean test.
This is very well spoken err written---except that I would use
beautifully
Hi,
As you know, I'm currently busy writing a paper on the architecture of
Parrot, and during my attempt to describe the exception sub-system,
something came to mind. I'm not sure if the event system is fully
operational (I thought it was already implemented), but I do know the
plan was to che
(More brain dump.)
"Context" is implemented as type coercion calls, implicitly inserted
by the compiler.
There are five types used in these calls. The "..." below denote
the positions where these contexts typically occur, using common
Perl 5 operations as examples:
Void # ...;
Instead of
multi sub *infix:<~>(ArabicStr $s1, ArabicStr $s2) {...}
multi sub *infix:<~>(Str $s1, ArabicStr $s2) {...}
multi sub *infix:<~>(ArabicStr $s1, Str $s2) {...}
could you say
multi sub *infix:<~>(ArabicStr $s1, ArabicStr | Str $s2) | (Str
$s1, ArabicStr $s2) {...}
or so
Andy,
Were you caught by either "takes too long" or "Overwhelms some
compilers."? I'm wondering if it's worth disabling optimizations for
those compilation units if nobody noticed a problem in the period
between the tree reorganization and the breakage of --optimize.
Cheers,
-J
--
On Tue, Jan
27 matches
Mail list logo
