On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, Jeff Clites wrote:
> On Oct 26, 2003, at 10:39 AM, Melvin Smith wrote:
>
> > I think a compromise would be to do define a interpreter global PMCNull
> > and point (or init) all Px registers to it.
> ...
> > The downside is fast initialization of register blocks. memsetting
> >
At 05:28 PM 10/27/2003 -0800, Jeff Clites wrote:
On Oct 26, 2003, at 10:39 AM, Melvin Smith wrote:
I think a compromise would be to do define a interpreter global PMCNull
and point (or init) all Px registers to it.
...
The downside is fast initialization of register blocks. memsetting with
NULL (
On Oct 26, 2003, at 10:39 AM, Melvin Smith wrote:
I think a compromise would be to do define a interpreter global PMCNull
and point (or init) all Px registers to it.
...
The downside is fast initialization of register blocks. memsetting
with NULL (0)
will not be possible, but I'd have to actually
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003, Melvin Smith wrote:
> At 07:21 PM 10/26/2003 +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> >Steve Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Although this does bring up another issue -- should parrot really be
> > > seg faulting when it gets a uninitialized (null) PMC?
> >
> >The problem is
Steve Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Likewise, if I declare the .pcc_sub to be non_prototyped (so that both
> the call and declaration are non_prototyped), I get the same error:
Non-protyped returns are not implemented.
> I'll throw in one more thing just because I know a certain Mr. P.
> Caw
Melvin Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Technically its not a problem and relatively easy to implement.
[ Aother note ]
$ perldoc imcc/docs/calling_conventions.pod
ยท pcc_call
Takes either 2 arguments: the sub and the return
continuation, or the sub only. For the lat
Steve Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That is working for me now for the parameter passing, but not for
> return values.
As Melvin said, you are still mixing calling conventsion. *But* return
conventions are currently only prototyped. We don't have any syntax yet
to denote the desired behavior.
I'll throw in one more thing just because I know a certain Mr. P.
Cawley dearly loves people to pile unrelated things into a single
thread: could there be a way to expose which continuation to invoke
when returning from a routine? In a regex, I'd really like a rule to
be invoked with a "success" c
On Oct-26, Melvin Smith wrote:
> At 06:25 PM 10/26/2003 -0800, Steve Fink wrote:
> > .pcc_sub _main prototyped
> > .pcc_begin_return
> > .return 10
> > .return 20
> > .pcc_end_return
> > .end
>
> It is still the same issue. This code explicitly mixes 2 call co
However, I see your point. To be orthogonal would suggest that we
implement the same feature for .pcc_call that we do for the .pcc_sub
I meant .pcc_begin here since that is where the proto|non_proto goes.
-Melvin
At 06:25 PM 10/26/2003 -0800, Steve Fink wrote:
On Oct-26, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> Steve Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I am getting a seg fault when doing a very simple subroutine call with
> > IMCC:
>
> > .sub _main
> > newsub $P4, .Sub, _two_of
> > $P6 = new Per
On Oct-26, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> Steve Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I am getting a seg fault when doing a very simple subroutine call with
> > IMCC:
>
> > .sub _main
> > newsub $P4, .Sub, _two_of
> > $P6 = new PerlHash
> > .pcc_begin prototyped
>
On Oct-26, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> Steve Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I am getting a seg fault when doing a very simple subroutine call with
> > IMCC:
>
> > .sub _main
> > newsub $P4, .Sub, _two_of
> > $P6 = new PerlHash
> > .pcc_begin prototyped
>
At 07:21 PM 10/26/2003 +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Steve Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Although this does bring up another issue -- should parrot really be
> seg faulting when it gets a uninitialized (null) PMC?
The problem is of course that we call pmc->vtable->some_meth_od() on a
NULL PMC.
Steve Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Although this does bring up another issue -- should parrot really be
> seg faulting when it gets a uninitialized (null) PMC?
The problem is of course that we call pmc->vtable->some_meth_od() on a
NULL PMC. We could do the checks always, slowing down each PM
At 11:50 PM 10/25/2003 -0700, Steve Fink wrote:
newsub $P4, .Sub, _two_of
Leo answered your question, I just wanted to point out that you can
now write the above as:
$P4 = newsub _two_of
As Leo said, the call types conflict. In this case we eventually
should be able to make IMCC warn y
Steve Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am getting a seg fault when doing a very simple subroutine call with
> IMCC:
> .sub _main
> newsub $P4, .Sub, _two_of
> $P6 = new PerlHash
> .pcc_begin prototyped
^^
> .pcc_sub _t
I am getting a seg fault when doing a very simple subroutine call with
IMCC:
.sub _main
newsub $P4, .Sub, _two_of
$P6 = new PerlHash
.pcc_begin prototyped
.arg $P6
.arg 14
.pcc_call $P4
after:
.pcc_end
18 matches
Mail list logo
