[perl #49236] [BUG] Segfault generating config.fpmc during build

2008-04-07 Thread Will Coleda via RT
On Mon Dec 31 21:53:55 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Monday 31 December 2007 16:08:09 Joseph Sadusk wrote: > > > Actually, yeah, I was using -j4, and I just tried without and it > works > > fine. Didn't even think of that. Strange how consistently it > repros > > with it though. Sorry abo

[perl #42699] r18304 Test failures on NexentaOS (GNU/OpenSolaris)

2008-04-07 Thread Will Coleda via RT
On Tue Apr 24 03:05:33 2007, rblasch wrote: > This is a follow up for ticket #42587, using Parrot r18304. > > SunOS nexenta 5.11 NexentaOS_20061012 i86pc i386 i86pc Solaris > gcc (GCC) 4.0.3 (GNU_Solaris 4.0.3-1nexenta6) > > Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed > --

[perl #41328] [BUG] pmc2c generates unnecessary code for void functions

2008-04-07 Thread Will Coleda via RT
On Tue Jan 23 14:20:21 2007, particle wrote: > when compiling src/pmc/pmethod.c, cl has a few warnings: > > src\pmc\pmethod_test.c > D:/usr\local\parrot\bug\tools\build\../../lib\Parrot\Pmc2c\Utils.pm(1096) > : warn > ing C4102: 'test_method0_returns' : unreferenced label > D:/usr\local\parrot\bug

[perl #43719] [TODO] Complain about using, e.g. $3 in an op with only 2 args

2008-04-07 Thread Will Coleda via RT
On Tue Jul 10 05:40:52 2007, ptc wrote: > In the file lib/Parrot/OpsFile.pm there is the todo item: > > # TODO: Complain about using, e.g. $3 in an op with only 2 args. > > This needs to be implemented. With the attached patch, the following op: inline op if(invar INT, labelconst INT) {

[perl #42427] [CAGE] cleanup perlcritic errors

2008-04-07 Thread Will Coleda via RT
On Wed Apr 02 19:14:57 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Fri Mar 28 07:07:37 2008, coke wrote: > > > > > > perlcritic is passing all tests at the moment. Added back to the set > of > > default tests run in r26591. Closing ticket. > > I'm re-opening this ticket due to problems I have experienced

[perl #52570] [PATCH] Simplify ops syntax

2008-04-07 Thread via RT
# New Ticket Created by Will Coleda # Please include the string: [perl #52570] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=52570 > The current op definitions have a majority of ops that end with "goto NEXT();", indicatin

Re: Protected data member access considered harmful

2008-04-07 Thread John M. Dlugosz
Thom Boyer thom-at-boyers.org |Perl 6| wrote: I believe Mr. Stroustrup's deprecation of 'protected' access applies only to data data members, not function members: Fortunately, you don't have to use protected data in C++; 'private' is the default in classes and is usually the better choice.

What I'm Working On

2008-04-07 Thread John M. Dlugosz
I'm taking a stab at turning the S\d\d documents into a formal standard. Going through S02, each factoid gets filed away in a developing outline. I'm using a single ODT file to make it easy to manipulate the outline (currently mostly stubs). Here is an early effort to flesh out imprecise spec

Protected data member access considered harmful

2008-04-07 Thread Thom Boyer
Larry Wall wrote: How private is private? I wonder if what you've called private things are really more like "protected" in C++ (accessible by the derived class) and that 'my' attributes are really private, as are submethods. It's all confused. Who is allowed to access what? >>

[perl #52556] [PATCH] Eclectus: simplify PAST generation a bit

2008-04-07 Thread via RT
# New Ticket Created by Andreas Rottmann # Please include the string: [perl #52556] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=52556 > Hi! The attached patch simplifies the generation of PAST nodes somewhat. compiler

[perl #48030] [DEPRECATED] compilers/PAST-pm, Parrot/HLLCompiler.pir

2008-04-07 Thread Bernhard Schmalhofer via RT
On Sa. 05. Apr. 2008, 07:40:12, bernhard wrote: > On Di. 26. Feb. 2008, 13:37:20, bernhard wrote: > > > > The compiler tools in compilers/PAST-pm/ and > > > runtime/parrot/library/Parrot/HLLCompiler.pir are deprecated > > > in favor of the new versions in the Parrot Compiler Toolkit > > > ( compil

SVN checkin: r26841 'perl Configure.pl' is required after svn update

2008-04-07 Thread Bernhard Schmalhofer
Hi, in r26841 I removed the directory 'compilers/past-pm', resolving the deprecation item from RT#48030. After updating to the new revision, a 'perl Configure.pl' is required, as Makefile dependencies have changed. Best regards, Bernhard

Re: cross operator and empty list

2008-04-07 Thread Darren Duncan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Technically the Cartesian cross operator doesn't have an identity value. There is no set X such that A x X = A. Now any singleton set gives a result that is naturally isomorphic to the original set, I.e, there is a obvious bijection between the two sets, but they are no

Re: cross operator and empty list

2008-04-07 Thread mark . a . biggar
Technically the Cartesian cross operator doesn't have an identity value. There is no set X such that A x X = A. Now any singleton set gives a result that is naturally isomorphic to the original set, I.e, there is a obvious bijection between the two sets, but they are not equal sets. -- Mark

Re: cross operator and empty list

2008-04-07 Thread Darren Duncan
Adriano, I think perhaps what Tsa is trying to get at is the identity value for the X operator, and I believe I know what it is. In the relational model of data, both the version of the model where tuples have unordered named attributes/elements (which I prefer), and the version where tuples h

[perl #49686] [CAGE] t/library/streams.t: Determine whether test can be divided into smaller files

2008-04-07 Thread James Keenan via RT
Examination this file suggests that it is long because the tests are largely data-driven. Nonetheless, the file appears to be conceptually whole. Hence, there is no compelling case for subdividing this test file. I am closing the ticket.

[perl #49704] [CAGE] t/op/string.t: Determine whether test can be divided into smaller files

2008-04-07 Thread James Keenan via RT
Examination of t/op/*.t files with > 1000 lines suggests that the files are long because the tests are largely data-driven. Nonetheless, the files appear to be conceptually whole. Hence, there is no compelling case for subdividing this test file. I am closing the ticket.

[perl #49694] [CAGE] t/op/integer.t: Determine whether test can be divided into smaller files

2008-04-07 Thread James Keenan via RT
Examination of t/op/*.t files with > 1000 lines suggests that the files are long because the tests are largely data-driven. Nonetheless, the files appear to be conceptually whole. Hence, there is no compelling case for subdividing this test file. I am closing the ticket.

[perl #49692] [CAGE] t/op/cmp-nonbranch.t: Determine whether test can be divided into smaller files

2008-04-07 Thread James Keenan via RT
Examination of t/op/*.t files with > 1000 lines suggests that the files are long because the tests are largely data-driven. Nonetheless, the files appear to be conceptually whole. Hence, there is no compelling case for subdividing this test file. I am closing the ticket.

[perl #49684] [CAGE] t/op/number.t: Determine whether test can be divided into smaller files

2008-04-07 Thread James Keenan via RT
Examination of t/op/*.t files with > 1000 lines suggests that the files are long because the tests are largely data-driven. Nonetheless, the files appear to be conceptually whole. Hence, there is no compelling case for subdividing this test file. I am closing the ticket.

[perl #49682] [CAGE] t/op/lexicals.t: Determine whether test can be divided into smaller files

2008-04-07 Thread James Keenan via RT
Examination of t/op/*.t files with > 1000 lines suggests that the files are long because the tests are largely data-driven. Nonetheless, the files appear to be conceptually whole. Hence, there is no compelling case for subdividing this test file. I am closing the ticket.

[perl #49670] [CAGE] t/op/calling.t: Determine whether test can be divided into smaller files

2008-04-07 Thread James Keenan via RT
Examination of t/op/*.t files with > 1000 lines suggests that the files are long because the tests are largely data-driven. Nonetheless, the files appear to be conceptually whole. Hence, there is no compelling case for subdividing this test file. I am closing the ticket.

Re: cross operator and empty list

2008-04-07 Thread Adriano Ferreira
On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 4:50 AM, TSa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > HaloO, > > > Larry Wall wrote: > > >(@a X @b X @c).elems == @a.elems * @b.elems * @c.elems > > > > Sorry, I was aiming at defining a neutral element of the X > operator. A neutral element for the cross operator seems weird if

[perl #52504] [PATCH]: Refactor repeated code into auto::ports

2008-04-07 Thread James Keenan via RT
On Mon Apr 07 06:42:22 2008, doughera wrote: > > Did you mean to call this auto::macports, or is this step intended to > eventually encompass the FreeBSD-style ports collection as well. I don't > know if macports is a derivative of FreeBSD ports or not. I do know that > NetBSD and OpenBSD bo

Re: [perl #52504] [PATCH]: Refactor repeated code into auto::ports

2008-04-07 Thread Andy Dougherty
On Sat, 5 Apr 2008, James Keenan wrote: > # New Ticket Created by James Keenan > # Please include the string: [perl #52504] > # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. > # http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=52504 > > > > In http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/

Parrot Bug Summary

2008-04-07 Thread Parrot Bug Summary
Parrot Bug Summary http://rt.perl.org/rt3/NoAuth/parrot/Overview.html Generated at Mon Apr 7 13:00:07 2008 GMT --- * Numbers * New Issues * Overview of Open Issues * Ticket Status By Version * Requestors with mo

[perl #51980] [PATCH] fixed multiple redefines of snprintf macro

2008-04-07 Thread Andrew Whitworth via RT
On Sat Apr 05 21:33:49 2008, infinoid wrote: > On Fri Mar 21 09:03:08 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > there is a definition on my system for PARROT_HAS_SNPRINTF, but not a > > definition for PARROT_HAS_C99_SNPRINTF. I assume, on first glance that > > these two macros are one in the same and shou

Re: cross operator and empty list

2008-04-07 Thread TSa
HaloO, Larry Wall wrote: (@a X @b X @c).elems == @a.elems * @b.elems * @c.elems Sorry, I was aiming at defining a neutral element of the X operator. In cartesian products of sets this is achieved by having a set that contains as sole member the empty tuple. So how would that be written? ((