On Thursday 24 January 2008 19:11:37 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Author: petdance
> Date: Thu Jan 24 19:11:36 2008
> New Revision: 25208
>
> Modified:
>trunk/src/exceptions.c
>
> Log:
> Added missing break to switch statement (!!!). Added checks for NULL
> pointers
> --- trunk/src/exceptions.
From: Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 09:52:16 -0800
In addition to what Patrick said, which is all right on the mark,
I'd like to point out a few additional subtleties.
Perl borrows an important idea from Lisp and separates the notion
of stack unwinding fr
On Jan 24, 2008, at 23:23 , Darren Duncan wrote:
I'd be more interested in hearing what precedents if any exist in
this regard. What do other languages call the same concepts?
data Ord = LT | EQ | GT -- Haskell
--
brandon s. allbery [solaris,freebsd,perl,pugs,haskell] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
sys
At 7:20 PM -0800 1/24/08, Jonathan Lang wrote:
Instead, I'll say that the idea that Order::Increase numifies to -1 is
going to take some getting used to. While I understand the reasoning
behind it, my intuition would have been to numify it to +1 for an
increase and -1 for a decrease.
I don't s
Thom Boyer wrote:
> The enumerations and the numerical values are both in correct order.
> Since "abc" is less than "xyz", "abc" cmp "xyz" is being invoked with
> its arguments in increasing order, So it returns Order::Increase. That
> numifies to -1 because that's how "less-than" is usually encod
On Thu Jan 24 17:38:33 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Yeah, I get that on Strawberry Perl too. It surprised me, and it
> pauses the configure process until you click "Don't send report".
>
>
> > Might there be some obscure connection with
> > [perl #41508] [BUG] Configure losing flags... ?
On Thu Jan 24 17:43:06 2008, doughera wrote:
>
> This sounds like a problem in the hints file. I don't know what platform
> this is, but I'd look in the hints file to see if it unconditionally
> sets ccflags and ldflags without checking the command line options.
>
It's Darwin, whose hints file
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, James Keenan via RT wrote:
> Some data questions:
>
> 1. Are you working from a checkout from the repository or from a Parrot
> monthly release tarball?
>
> 2. If the former, which VCS did you use to make the checkout? (By
> implication, which VCS do you expect to be exer
> On Thu Jan 24 10:31:46 2008, coke wrote:
>
> >
> > Here's my current Config script:
> >
> > CCACHE="ccache "
> > CC="${CCACHE}gcc-4.0"
> > CX="${CCACHE}g++-4.0"
> > perl Configure.pl --cc="$CC" --cxx="$CX" --link="$CX" --ld="$CX"
> > --ccflags="-L/opt/local/lib -I/opt/local/include"
> > --ldf
Hi, Alan! What kind of CPU do you have? If you have an AMD Athlon XP
(or something of similar lineage), I think I know what the problem is.
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 12:52:35 -0800
Alan Rocker (via RT) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Determining if your platform supports GMP...Can't spawn ".\test.exe":
On Thu Jan 24 12:52:34 2008, ajr wrote:
> Using the "Strawberry Perl" installed on Windows XP resulted in the
> following failure output from the Configure step:
>
> Determining if your platform supports GMP...Can't spawn ".\test.exe": Bad
> file descriptor at lib/Parrot/Configure/Utils.pm line 85
Some data questions:
1. Are you working from a checkout from the repository or from a Parrot
monthly release tarball?
2. If the former, which VCS did you use to make the checkout? (By
implication, which VCS do you expect to be exercised in _analyze_sandbox()?)
I ask because if you are working
On Thu Jan 24 14:28:29 2008, cosimo wrote:
> On Gio. 24 Gen. 2008 14:13:20, cosimo wrote:
> > > So I wrote and tested this patch against r24953
> > > which adds approx() to languages/perl6/Test.pm.
> >
> > Applies also for r25206.
>
> Extended to provide also a `is_approx()'.
> This is also more
Hi,
Zach Morgan (via RT) wrote:
hello, all. Attached (hopefully) is a patch to implement get_string for
perl6's junctions. I looked in synopsis 9 and saw nothing about any
get_string, so I decided on the simplest, most straightforward approach.
That looks to me more like an implementation of
# New Ticket Created by Zach Morgan
# Please include the string: [perl #50220]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=50220 >
severity: medium
category: languages
hello, all. Attached (hopefully) is a patch to imp
# New Ticket Created by Alan Rocker
# Please include the string: [perl #50214]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=50214 >
Using the "Strawberry Perl" on Windows XP to install Parrot resulted in the
attached warn
# New Ticket Created by Cosimo Streppone
# Please include the string: [perl #50216]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=50216 >
Recently I've been working on the perl6 test suite
that lives in pugs/t/spec reposit
On 2008-01-24 Thom Boyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Joe Gottman wrote:
> > In the definition of cmp, S29 says the function "returns
> > |Order::Increase|, |Order::Decrease|, or |Order::Same| (which
> > numify to -1, 0, +1)". Shouldn't the enumerations and their
> > numerical values be listed
# New Ticket Created by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# Please include the string: [perl #50218]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=50218 >
Hope this is helpful - I haven't been able to solve this but
03-revision.t and 04
At 11:37 AM -0700 1/24/08, Thom Boyer wrote:
Joe Gottman wrote:
In the definition of cmp, S29 says the function "returns
|Order::Increase|, |Order::Decrease|, or |Order::Same| (which
numify to -1, 0, +1)". Shouldn't the enumerations and their
numerical values be listed in the same order?
# New Ticket Created by Alan Rocker
# Please include the string: [perl #50212]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=50212 >
Using the "Strawberry Perl" installed on Windows XP resulted in the
following failure out
Joe Gottman wrote:
In the definition of cmp, S29 says the function "returns
|Order::Increase|, |Order::Decrease|, or |Order::Same| (which numify
to -1, 0, +1)". Shouldn't the enumerations and their numerical values
be listed in the same order?
Joe Gottman
The enumerations and the numerical
On Jan 23, 2008 11:15 PM, James Keenan via RT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed Feb 14 09:09:14 2007, coke wrote:
> > Trying to build with GMP support on OSX intel. I have libgmp in
> > /opt/local/bin/
> >
> > if I run:
> >
> > CC="ccache gcc-4.0"
> > CX="ccache g++-4.0"
> > perl Configure.pl --c
In addition to what Patrick said, which is all right on the mark,
I'd like to point out a few additional subtleties.
Perl borrows an important idea from Lisp and separates the notion
of stack unwinding from that of exception handling; when you throw
an exception (including a control exception) you
On Jan 24, 2008 9:02 AM, Patrick R. Michaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 11:58:02AM -0500, Mark J. Reed wrote:
> > Sorry if I'm missing something here, since I haven't dived into the
> > innards of Parrot, but I thought control flow in Parrot was based on
> > continuations?
On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 11:58:02AM -0500, Mark J. Reed wrote:
> Sorry if I'm missing something here, since I haven't dived into the
> innards of Parrot, but I thought control flow in Parrot was based on
> continuations? Presumably 'control exceptions' are really just
> lexicaly-scoped exceptions,
Sorry if I'm missing something here, since I haven't dived into the
innards of Parrot, but I thought control flow in Parrot was based on
continuations? Presumably 'control exceptions' are really just
lexicaly-scoped exceptions, and exceptions are in turn just
outgoing-only continuations. If you h
On Sat, Jan 19, 2008 at 12:24:37PM +0100, Klaas-Jan Stol wrote:
> as far as I could tell there's no support for goto statements in PCT (that
> is, special nodes or something).
> I don't know whether there are any plans to add special support for it, but
> here's an idea I was thinking about. It wou
# New Ticket Created by Christoph Otto
# Please include the string: [perl #50186]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=50186 >
The Env PMC doesn't check whether integer indicies are smaller than the number
of ele
> BEGIN (right now at compile time)
> UNITCHECK (at end of this compilation unit)
> CHECK (at end of main compilation)
>(compile time finishes)
>...time passes...
>(run time starts)
> INIT
> (main starts running)
> ENTER (every block entry)
> START (f
30 matches
Mail list logo
