Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> However, my problem remains. What does the poor generic programmer do
> when he needs generic equality!?
unfortunetly, no such thing exists.
see:
http://xrl.us/fdz
and
http://www.nhplace.com/kent/PS/EQUAL.html
although the specifics are common lisp
Chris Dutton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sunday, March 16, 2003, at 05:09 PM, David Storrs wrote:
>
> > ==QUESTION
> > - Page 8 says "In some languages, all methods are multimethods." I
> > believe that Java is one of these. Is that right and what are some
> > others? (This is really just
speaking of compiling directly to pbc, parrotbyte.pod says that number
constants should be encoded as FLOATVALs, which is a system dependant
careteristic, shouldn't there be a specified format for floats? ie
either ieee single/double float or, preferably, the number segment
specifies how bytes are
Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 27 Oct 2002, Marco Baringer wrote:
> : why not use -> to create a sub which you can return from?
> :
> : if $foo -> {
> : ...
> : return if $bar;
> : ...
> : }
>
> Except that by the current rule you ca
"Steve Canfield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Will Perl6 have labeled if blocks? Like this:
>
> BLAH:
> if ($foo) {
> ...
> last BLAH if $bar;
> ...
> }
why not use -> to create a sub which you can return from?
if $foo -> {
...
return if $bar;
...
}
this of course
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If you define "powerful" as "can do more things," then of course not.
> Lisp is implemented in C, and C's macros are certainly not essential
[aside: most "major" common lisp implementations (cmucl, sbcl,
openmcl, mcl, allegro and lispworks) are all native
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ah, this is incorrect. goto ADDRESS should go to an absolute address,
> period. It's for use in those times when you *have* an absolute
> address--for example when you've just fetched the address of a
> subroutine from a symbol table.
but what do i put
Jason Gloudon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[i distincly remember sending this email, but it's not in the web
archive or in my gnus archive, so i'm sending it again, pardon me if
you've already seen this]
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 01:49:20PM +0200, Marco Baringer wrote:
in trying to make goto ADDRESS($1) work as it should i have come
across the following doubt:
out of core_ops.c, core_ops_cg.c and core_ops_prederef.c which one is
parrot using? and how do i change it if i want? i notice while
compling is have the HAVE_COMPUTED_GOTO macro defined, but it seems
(a
Steve Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Could you describe better the need and usefulness of these ops? My
> immediate reaction is "Why not just code loops ourselves?" I think
> your ops can be implemented in two currently-existing opcodes apiece,
> and I'm guessing that JIT support for the more
ok, please pardon the inconvience but everytime i send mail to
perl6-internals the body of my message disappears...
anyway, here's what i meant to say:
[original email]
i have written a simple emacs mode, providing highlighting,
indentation, and compilation, for dealing with .pasm files, it's
pasm.el
Description: application/emacs-lisp
Index: core.ops
===
RCS file: /cvs/public/parrot/core.ops,v
retrieving revision 1.120
diff -u -r1.120 core.ops
--- core.ops 14 Apr 2002 02:05:46 - 1.120
+++ core.ops 14 Apr 2002 18:11:
sorry, the body of that message got lost:
parrot is a cool technology, but it's s buzzword-lacking. well,
here's the solution: xml based assembler!
--
-Marco
Ring the bells that still can ring.
Forget the perfect offering.
There's a crack in everything.
It's how the light gets in.
-Is
PML.tar.gz
Description: Binary data
14 matches
Mail list logo
