Author: allison
Date: Tue Mar 27 23:03:28 2007
New Revision: 17805
Modified:
trunk/docs/pdds/draft/pdd15_objects.pod
Log:
[pdd]: Quick consistency fix for I/O PDD from jonathan++
Modified: trunk/docs/pdds/draft/pdd15_objects.pod
===
Author: allison
Date: Tue Mar 27 16:24:01 2007
New Revision: 17796
Modified:
trunk/docs/pdds/draft/pdd15_objects.pod
Log:
[pdd]: A round of comments from jonathan++ and particle++
Modified: trunk/docs/pdds/draft/pdd15_objects.pod
==
Am Dienstag, 27. März 2007 21:55 schrieb Andrew Dougherty:
> On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> > I think you'll find a lot of lower-level cleanups are in order.
>
> [other stuff deleted.]
>
> Oops! My previous message was not appropriate, and I didn't mean to send
> it. Please ignore i
Am Dienstag, 27. März 2007 21:39 schrieb Andy Dougherty:
> Leo
> tended to assume all pointers could equally well point anywhere, and often
> ignored alignment issues.
Nope. Sorry.
leo
Am Dienstag, 27. März 2007 19:52 schrieb Andy Dougherty:
> Instead of sprinking (opcode_t *) casts everywhere, wouldn't it be better
> to declare the invoke() function as returning an (opcode_t *) ?
True. But while invoke() et al receive and return an (opcode_t*) the actual
running runloop (wi
Am Dienstag, 27. März 2007 16:19 schrieb Andy Dougherty:
> Many of the examples in examples/shootout specify preferred flags. For
> example, ack.pir starts with
>
> #!./parrot -Oc -Cj
>
> I don't know what -Oc does. docs/running.pod doesn't say. It refers to
> the non-existent F for more det
A discussion of draft document
<http://rakudo.org/parrot/index.cgi?parallel_development_requirements>,
with some side threads edited out. See
<http://www.parrotcode.org/misc/parrotsketch-logs/irclog.parrotsketch-200703/irclog.parrotsketch.20070327>
for the full text.
...
ignore
Article cancelled by slrn 0.9.8.1
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> I think you'll find a lot of lower-level cleanups are in order.
[other stuff deleted.]
Oops! My previous message was not appropriate, and I didn't mean to send
it. Please ignore it. I'm sorry about that.
--
Andy Dougherty [EMAIL
ignore
Article cancelled by slrn 0.9.8.1
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Steve Peters via RT wrote:
> On Tue Mar 27 10:54:17 2007, doughera wrote:
> > Instead of sprinking (opcode_t *) casts everywhere, wouldn't it be better
> > to declare the invoke() function as returning an (opcode_t *) ?
> > Similarly for most of the other bits you patched.
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, chromatic wrote:
> On Sunday 25 March 2007 05:22, James Keenan wrote:
>
> > On Mar 24, 2007, at 11:53 PM, chromatic wrote:
> > > On Saturday 24 March 2007 09:06, James Keenan wrote:
> > >> < ld='c++', ldflags=' -L/usr/local/lib
> > >> -L/Users/jimk/work/fresh/blib/lib -fl
On Saturday 24 March 2007 05:36, Klaas-Jan Stol wrote:
> attached a patch that adds a return statement to clone in iterator.pmc
> (which was obviously forgotten?)
How interesting that it didn't fail on Linux with GCC. Anyway, applied as
r17794.
-- c
On Sunday 25 March 2007 05:22, James Keenan wrote:
> On Mar 24, 2007, at 11:53 PM, chromatic wrote:
> > On Saturday 24 March 2007 09:06, James Keenan wrote:
> >> < ld='c++', ldflags=' -L/usr/local/lib
> >> -L/Users/jimk/work/fresh/blib/lib -flat_namespace ', ---
> >>> ld='/usr/bin/g++-3.3
On Tuesday 27 March 2007 11:32, chromatic wrote:
> On Monday 26 March 2007 20:55, Steve Peters wrote:
> > A couple of functions in XX are trying to return values from void
> > functions. To some compilers, such as the standard HP-UX compilers, this
> > is a big no-no. The patch below fixes this p
Perhaps this is too complicated a method. The shootouts should
probably be ran with the testing core. If you want to test the CGP
core, use 'make testC', and so on. Otherwise, how will we know if
ack.pir starts failing with a different runcore? I'd feel it'd be
preferable to ignore the firs
On Tuesday 27 March 2007 07:19, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> Ignoring that for the moment, the second set of flags is the problem.
> On a system with neither -C nor -j, t/examples/shootout.t would leave
> the second argument there as a plain '-'. Parrot would then sit waiting
> forever for stdin, and
On Monday 26 March 2007 20:55, Steve Peters wrote:
> A couple of functions in XX are trying to return values from void
> functions. To some compilers, such as the standard HP-UX compilers, this is
> a big no-no. The patch below fixes this problem.
Thanks, applied as r17791.
-- c
On Tue Mar 27 10:54:17 2007, doughera wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Steve Peters wrote:
>
> > # New Ticket Created by Steve Peters
> > # Please include the string: [perl #42151]
> > # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
> > # http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display
On Monday 26 March 2007 19:30, Steve Peters wrote:
> Intel C++ identifies itself as gcc. Often this can lead to unusual
> failures throughout a compile. The patch below helps to identify gcc
> compilers correctly.
Thanks, applied as r17789.
-- c
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Steve Peters wrote:
> # New Ticket Created by Steve Peters
> # Please include the string: [perl #42151]
> # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
> # http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=42151 >
Thanks for taking on this Herculean tas
Looks great Steve,
could (PMC *) get added to the NEED_CONTINUATION macro
Index: include/parrot/sub.h
===
--- include/parrot/sub.h(revision 17785)
+++ include/parrot/sub.h(working copy)
@@ -109,7 +109,7 @@
* a flag
# New Ticket Created by Steve Peters
# Please include the string: [perl #42151]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=42151 >
Index: src/ops/experimental.ops
# New Ticket Created by Andy Dougherty
# Please include the string: [perl #42135]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=42135 >
Many of the examples in examples/shootout specify preferred flags. For
example, ack.
On 3/27/07, Will Coleda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Each week, a group of developers working on Parrot and Parrot-related
projects gathers online to discuss progress, changes and the state of the
metaphorical weather. This meeting currently occurs each Tuesday at 18:30
UTC, in the #parrotsketch c
"Each week, a group of developers working on Parrot and Parrot-related
projects gathers online to discuss progress, changes and the state of the
metaphorical weather. This meeting currently occurs each Tuesday at 18:30
UTC, in the #parrotsketch channel on irc (irc.perl.org)."
Today, in additio
On Tue Mar 27 05:32:41 2007, doughera wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Mar 2007, Steve Peters wrote:
>
> > # New Ticket Created by Steve Peters
> > # Please include the string: [perl #42110]
> > # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
> > # http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.h
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007, Steve Peters wrote:
> # New Ticket Created by Steve Peters
> # Please include the string: [perl #42110]
> # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
> # http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=42110 >
>
>
> A couple of functions in XX are
On Mon Mar 26 21:40:39 2007, guest wrote:
> On Mon Mar 26 18:38:00 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Error in the previous report: t/src/io.t failed during 'make test'
> > (both times I ran it), but
>
> Can you clarify: did or did not the iterator test fail? If so, I am
> probably the one to lo
I've applied my patch successfully on both Darwin and Linux; kjs indicated on
IRC that he got it
working on Windows. Assuming there is no objection, I will apply it to trunk
on Wed Mar 28.
30 matches
Mail list logo
