On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 10:28, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> If we've a good reason to keep the compatibility wiht 5.005, I'd like
> to do so. OTOH, if there's no good reason I'm fine with tossing it.
> IIRC at least one reasonably modern Unix ships with 5.005 as its base
> perl, but I don't remember whic
On Wed, 2004-03-24 at 13:58, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
> Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > At the moment I'm thinking of the load path as an array of subs that get
> > passed in the file being looked for and return... something. I'm not
> > sure what, though.
>
> Filehandles, I think. The most comm
On Sat, 2004-03-13 at 17:07, luka frelih wrote:
> > But how should the two interpretations of x.x be resolved? Is that
> > concatenation or method calling?
>
> wouldnt it be better to keep . as string glue
> and have method calls use the arrow -> or some
> such?
Or follow perl6 and use ~ for stri
On Sat, 2004-02-28 at 06:43, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> Kenneth A Graves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2004-02-27 at 16:08, Kenneth A Graves wrote:
> >>
> >> How do I verify which runloops/features are working?
>
> CGoto core: make testg testC
Both
On Fri, 2004-02-27 at 16:08, Kenneth A Graves wrote:
> I think this gives a PLATFORMS line of:
> freebsd5.2-i386 YYY ? ? Y Y
>
> How do I verify which runloops/features are working?
I added " or $^O eq 'freebsd'" to t/pmc/{
Builds, all tests (that aren't skipped) succeed on FreeBSD 5.2-CURRENT
on i386.
I think this gives a PLATFORMS line of:
freebsd5.2-i386 YYY ? ? Y Y
How do I verify which runloops/features are working?
--kag
myconfig:
Summary of my parrot 0.0.13 configuratio
