Howdy,
I am trying to load an installed perl6.pbc from the Parrot embedding
API like this:
#include "parrot/embed.h"
#include "parrot/extend.h"
Parrot_Interp interp;
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
Parrot_PMC func_pmc;
Parrot_String err, filename;
Parrot_set_config_hash();
i
On 2010-06-03, at 3:13 am, Moritz Lenz wrote:
> ... unless you push all the replacement markers onto an array, and
> traverse the array during the substitution phase.
I thought of that, but it didn't work when there's a case of longest-token
matching. That is, if you try to match both 'A' and 'A
On Thu, Jun 03, 2010 at 07:00:17PM +0200, Carl Mäsak wrote:
> sorear (>):
> > 2. Indenting a blank line results in a blank line, not a line with only
> > whitespace.
>
> What about indenting a line with only whitespace?
Implementor's choice; it won't come up in the viv port.
> I think I can se
sorear (>):
> I request that:
>
> 1. Blank lines should not be interpreted as having 0 indentation. Instead,
> lines consisting entirely of horizontal whitespace should be ignored in
> indent(*) considerations, and can be unindented by any amount. Unindenting
> a truly blank line has no eff
On Thu, Jun 03, 2010 at 03:52:02PM +0200, pugs-comm...@feather.perl6.nl wrote:
> Author: masak
> Date: 2010-06-03 15:52:01 +0200 (Thu, 03 Jun 2010)
> New Revision: 31082
>
> Modified:
>docs/Perl6/Spec/S32-setting-library/Str.pod
> Log:
> [S32/Str] rethinking of tab characters
>
> Also added a
Author: masak
Date: 2010-06-03 15:52:01 +0200 (Thu, 03 Jun 2010)
New Revision: 31082
Modified:
docs/Perl6/Spec/S32-setting-library/Str.pod
Log:
[S32/Str] rethinking of tab characters
Also added a Str.indent(*) use case.
Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S32-setting-library/Str.pod
===
Author: masak
Date: 2010-06-03 15:35:39 +0200 (Thu, 03 Jun 2010)
New Revision: 31081
Modified:
docs/Perl6/Spec/S32-setting-library/Str.pod
Log:
[S32/Str] proposed Str.indent
Following an idea bounced around on #perl6, this method was added.
Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S32-setting-library/Str.po
David Green wrote:
> On 2010-05-31, at 5:32 pm, Chris Fields wrote:
>> I think, in order to get regexes to work we will need a way of getting the
>> name of the matching regex from the Match object somehow. Any idea how to
>> do that?
afaict there's no direct way, only workarounds (as David sh
