A participant in this weekend's hackathon in Toronto posed this question:
"Invoking the compiler on a simple source file, then checking that the
generated code exists seems such an obvious test that there must be a
fatal flaw in it. What am I missing?"
Applied in r18355. Thanks!
--
Matt Diephouse
whorf wrote:
Parrot moves beyond the fragile stack-based control flow common to
virtual machines today, to a continuation-based control flow. (I can
recommend a few good books and articles if you're curious.)
Could you recommend the books and articles for the curious.
I've had quite a few requ
Nikolay,
Here's a few things you (and others) can do:
- give a talk about Parrot at your local linux/ruby/python/php/perl/etc
user group (recruiting new developers, and raising general awareness),
show working code
- contribute a patch (accelerating our path to the 1.0 release)
- document a
On Apr 29, 2007, at 12:55 PM, Allison Randal via RT wrote:
Joshua Isom (via RT) wrote:
My current svn repository uses a patch that I sent to the list about a
week ago, in which the pge tests would run with gc on if the file
DEVELOPING existed. Since I updated to over 18323,
t/compilers/pge/p5
From: Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 10:47:55 -0400 (EDT)
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Allison Randal via RT wrote:
> Agreed. I hate yielding compatibility, but it makes sense in this case
> (since we're likely to eventually require that any Perl 5 code in the
Joshua Isom (via RT) wrote:
My current svn repository uses a patch that I sent to the list about a
week ago, in which the pge tests would run with gc on if the file
DEVELOPING existed. Since I updated to over 18323,
t/compilers/pge/p5regex/p5rx.t segfaults after test 553. The
current_cont
chromatic wrote:
On Friday 27 April 2007 11:19, Andy Dougherty wrote:
Unfortunately, Configure.pl --gc=libc doesn't compile. I don't know how
long it's been broken. I do I know *I* haven't tried it for a very long
time. Here's the error message I get
I'm going to hold off on this patch. Al
On Apr 27, 2007, at 2:22 PM, Steve Peters wrote:
On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 09:22:22AM -0700, Steve Peters wrote:
# New Ticket Created by Steve Peters
# Please include the string: [perl #42768]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/
Am Freitag, 27. April 2007 22:10 schrieb chromatic:
> This part bothers me:
Indeed, your feeling is totally legitimate.
> +++ src/mmd.c (working copy)
> @@ -1703,7 +1703,12 @@
> +#ifndef __INTEL_COMPILER
> assert((PTR2UINTVAL(mmd_table[i].func_ptr) & 3) == 0);
The assert is of course
On 4/28/07, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Friday 27 April 2007 12:22, Steve Peters wrote:
> The attached additional patch fixes one problem caused by the previous
> patch and gets Intel C++ to compile and pass all of its tests on
> Linux. Only apply the attached patch after applying
On Apr 29, 2007, at 6:42 , Jonathan Lang wrote:
In effect, the signature gets attached as a property of the string,
and 'can()' checks for the signature property.
The only problem that I have with this idea is that I can't think of
any uses for a "signatory string" outside of '.can()'.
Maybe
hi,
related to this, I think that imcc also allows for built-in types as types.
such as ".local Array a" etc. (sorry can't check; don't have my own pc
around here, this is a public pc) (I added some notes about this and other
PIR cleanups in languages/PIR and I think also in compilers/pirc IIRC).
# New Ticket Created by Joshua Isom
# Please include the string: [perl #42792]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=42792 >
My current svn repository uses a patch that I sent to the list about a
week ago, in whic
# New Ticket Created by "Mehmet Yavuz Selim Soyturk"
# Please include the string: [perl #42790]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=42790 >
Next program makes a slurpy tailcall, and it causes a memory leak for me
Ovid wrote:
My apologies if these have been answered. I've been chatting with
Jonathan Worthington about some of this and any misconceptions are
mine, not his.
In reading through S12, I see that .can() returns an iterator for the
methods matched. What I'm curious about is this:
if $obj.can(
16 matches
Mail list logo
