On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 07:41:54PM -0700, Paul Hodges wrote:
: while length($ruler) < $len; # till there's enough
There is no length function anymore.
Larry
On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 09:46:14PM -0400, Joe Gottman wrote:
: Adriano Ferreira wrote:
: >I salute every bit of help. I am trying to organize the production and
: >will hopefully provide more details soon. By now, I think that I can
: >handle suggestions and corrections to the articles. The next on
Looks good . . . but how short do we want them?
For the non-Perl audience, I think it might be worth mentioning the
(to us) obvious automatic context manipulations. e.g.,
~ is "stitching" strings, and will make strings out of its arguments
if it can -- it's not adding, but has the same preceden
Adriano Ferreira wrote:
I salute every bit of help. I am trying to organize the production and
will hopefully provide more details soon. By now, I think that I can
handle suggestions and corrections to the articles. The next one is
here:
http://ferreira.nfshost.com/perl6/stitching6.html
Th
On 9/18/07, Paul Hodges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- Adriano Ferreira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [[snips here and at end]]
> > > . . . I have one suggestion: you might want to mention
> > > the roundrobin function in the article on the zip function since
> > > the two are very closely relat
--- Adriano Ferreira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[[snips here and at end]]
> > . . . I have one suggestion: you might want to mention
> > the roundrobin function in the article on the zip function since
> > the two are very closely related.
>
> Thanks, Joe and Alberto.
>
> Even though the roundro
See this non-RT thread on perl.perl6.internals for additional discussion
of the issues raised in this ticket: http://tinyurl.com/3y7kgf
See this non-RT thread on perl.perl6.internals for additional discussion
of the issues raised in this ticket: http://tinyurl.com/3y7kgf
# New Ticket Created by James Keenan
# Please include the string: [perl #45525]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=45525 >
A number of Parrot developers working on configuration steps (config/
*/*.pm and config
# New Ticket Created by James Keenan
# Please include the string: [perl #45523]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=45523 >
Configure.pl has long operated as a harness for the running of
individual configuratio
> I'm sorry to hear that. You're welcome back any time. All contributions
> are valuable, and isn't necessary to follow every detail of every aspect
> of the project to contribute.
Understood. It's just clear that I'm way out the loop on things, and I
don't have the time to talk about the thing
On behalf of the Parrot team, I'm proud to announce Parrot 0.4.16, "A
Farewell to Alex." Parrot (http://parrotcode.org/) is a virtual
machine aimed at running all dynamic languages.
Parrot 0.4.16 can be obtained via CPAN (soon), or follow the download
instructions at http://parrotcode.org/source.h
I am not sure what to quote so let me reply on a clean page.
I would like to see invalid configuration options and values as being always
fatal. They indicate some kind of user error, a typo or similar that would
probably cause trouble to the Parrot developer as well as the Parrot user.
In order
Andy Lester wrote:
The FUNCDOC hoohah points out something that has been bugging me for a
while and that now is actionable: I don't know WTF is going on any more.
I'm very out of touch, even though I sometimes sort of try to keep an
eye on what's going on. It's no way to be involved in a project
Andy Lester wrote:
We decided to remove FUNCDOC in May soon after it appeared. At the time
it only appeared in a couple of files, so I was surprised to it now
scattered over a couple of dozen files.
Who is "we"? I was entirely unaware of it. I've yanked POD on every
file that I've headerized
The FUNCDOC hoohah points out something that has been bugging me for a
while and that now is actionable: I don't know WTF is going on any more.
I'm very out of touch, even though I sometimes sort of try to keep an
eye on what's going on. It's no way to be involved in a project.
So, I'm backing ou
# New Ticket Created by Jerry Gay
# Please include the string: [perl #45507]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=45507 >
this ticket is a placeholder for the release scheduled for 16 October 2007
On Tuesday 18 September 2007 12:38:49 Andy Lester wrote:
> > We decided to remove FUNCDOC in May soon after it appeared. At the time
> > it only appeared in a couple of files, so I was surprised to it now
> > scattered over a couple of dozen files.
> Who is "we"? I was entirely unaware of it. I
> We decided to remove FUNCDOC in May soon after it appeared. At the time
> it only appeared in a couple of files, so I was surprised to it now
> scattered over a couple of dozen files.
Who is "we"? I was entirely unaware of it. I've yanked POD on every
file that I've headerized, which is all
# New Ticket Created by Nuno Carvalho
# Please include the string: [perl #45503]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=45503 >
Greetings,
While running 'make fulltest', for today's release, we noticed there
is a
Andy Lester wrote:
On Sep 18, 2007, at 9:04 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-FUNCDOC: mark_special
+=item C
This is a perfect example of why I want us to use FUNCDOC and not POD.
Who says that we are presenting functions as =item lists? Why is it
presented in C<>? =item C applies two levels
attached is a testfile.
file "imm.pir" contains:
.sub main
.end
.sub foo :postcomp
print "postcomp\n"
.end
.sub bar :immediate
print "immediate\n"
.end
=
and file "main.pir" contains:
===
.sub main2 :main
load_bytecode "imm.pir"
print "ok\n"
.en
On 9/18/07, Will Coleda via RT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed Sep 12 08:28:27 2007, kjs wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > From:
> > http://www.parrotcode.org/docs/pdd/pdd06_pasm.html
> >
> > The following flags are available: :main to indicate that execution should
> > start at the specified subroutin
On 9/18/07, Will Coleda via RT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed Sep 12 08:33:04 2007, kjs wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > IMCC currently allows for C++ style method invocation (using a pointer as
> > invocant).
> >
> > So, while this works:
> >
> > .sub main
> >$P0 = new 'Foo'
> >$P0.'bar'()
> >
On Wed Sep 12 08:33:04 2007, kjs wrote:
> Hi,
>
> IMCC currently allows for C++ style method invocation (using a pointer as
> invocant).
>
> So, while this works:
>
> .sub main
>$P0 = new 'Foo'
>$P0.'bar'()
> .end
>
> You could also write:
>
> .sub main
> $P0 = new 'Foo'
> $P0->bar
On Wed Sep 12 08:28:27 2007, kjs wrote:
> Hello,
>
> From:
> http://www.parrotcode.org/docs/pdd/pdd06_pasm.html
>
> The following flags are available: :main to indicate that execution should
> start at the specified subroutine; :immediate or :postcomp to indicate
that
> the sub should be run imme
On 18/09/2007, Andy Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sep 18, 2007, at 9:04 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > -FUNCDOC: mark_special
> > +=item C
>
> This is a perfect example of why I want us to use FUNCDOC and not
> POD. Who says that we are presenting functions as =item lists? Why
> is
On Sep 18, 2007, at 9:04 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-FUNCDOC: mark_special
+=item C
This is a perfect example of why I want us to use FUNCDOC and not
POD. Who says that we are presenting functions as =item lists? Why
is it presented in C<>? =item C applies two levels of
presentatio
On 9/18/07, brian d foy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Alberto Simões
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > Adriano Ferreira wrote:
> > > The plan is to write a series of blog entries discussing a Perl 6
> > > operator at a time or a small group of closely related ones
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Alberto Simões
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Adriano Ferreira wrote:
> > The plan is to write a series of blog entries discussing a Perl 6
> > operator at a time or a small group of closely related ones.
>
> I think the idea is cool. Also, I do not know how period
On 9/18/07, Agent Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/18/07, Adriano Ferreira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Join me. The drafts of the introduction and the first article are here:
> >
> > http://ferreira.nfshost.com/perl6/intro.html
> > http://ferreira.nfshost.com/perl6/zip.html
> >
>
> I
On Sep 18, 2007, at 12:29 AM, Allison Randal wrote:
For perspective, keep in mind that we will eventually be
refactoring the Perl 5-based configure system anyway, to remove the
dependency on an old install of Perl 5. So, the behavior of the
current prototype configuration system is more im
On Sep 18, 2007, at 12:29 AM, Allison Randal wrote:
I would like to have the option of making some configuration
failures fatal. The lack of a working C compiler is a good example,
but I imagine we will find others as we go along.
I would also like the option of telling Configure to igno
Author: paultcochrane
Date: Tue Sep 18 00:59:04 2007
New Revision: 21338
Modified:
trunk/docs/pdds/pdd03_calling_conventions.pod
Log:
[pdd] Removed deprecated opcode syntax as recommended by Allison Randal. This
resolves RT#45363
Modified: trunk/docs/pdds/pdd03_calling_conventions.pod
=
34 matches
Mail list logo
