At 07:10 PM 10/20/2001 -0400, Sam Tregar wrote:
>PS: Can we get this into languages/scheme?
I'm OK with that.
Dan
--"it's like this"---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED
Gregor N. Purdy sent the following bits through the ether:
> I'd like to see the folks with other language implementations speak
> up again about their current status and desires to have their stuff
> in CVS
My JVM -> Parrot stuff is going slowly, but parts of a Better Solution
are going up on C
Thanks for your confidence. Since one of the goals for Parrot seemed to be the
ability to target multiple languages to a single backend, I figured that we had to
have at least two languages to work with. That, and Scheme seemed to be a fairly
simple language to parse.
My code is currently in CVS,
All --
> Judging by the patches, this was a much earlier version than I intended to
> post. In the current version, min and max are now implemented, and test files
> evaluate two-operand and three-operand versions. The (<>=) operands work now
> with more than two operands, and I've added tests fo
Judging by the patches, this was a much earlier version than I intended to
post. In the current version, min and max are now implemented, and test files
evaluate two-operand and three-operand versions. The (<>=) operands work now
with more than two operands, and I've added tests for these with thr
Here's a patch to fix logical ops in the Parrot Scheme compiler. The
patch:
- Implements (min) and (max) which had stubs and some =pod'd out code
which I couldn't understand.
- Fixes (=), (<), (>), (<=) and (>=) to work with more than 2 operands.
Added tests where they were miss
