# New Ticket Created by Jürgen Bömmels
# Please include the string: [perl #23252]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=23252 >
Some refactoring in the seek/tell system.
Seek and tell now use both PIOFF_T for the
> A test for seek and tell is added to t/pmc/io.t
>
> All tests pass for Linux/i386 and MacOS X (thanks Dan)
>
> Windows is untested but I hope i got the things right.
t/pmc/io...NOK 3# Failed test (t/pmc/io.t at line 37)
# got: 'fdopen failed
# '
# expected: 'ok
# '
t
JüRgen" "BöMmels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Some refactoring in the seek/tell system.
Thanks, applied.
leo
Index: config/gen/makefiles/root.in
===
RCS file: /cvs/public/parrot/config/gen/makefiles/root.in,v
retrieving revision 1.104
diff -u -r1.104 root.in
--- config/gen/makefiles/root.in 12 Aug 2003 07:57:33 - 1.104
+++ config/gen/make
>This only happens on Windows. On Linux i can build pdb and step
>through the pasm code. This smells like makefile problems. Can you try
>the attached patch?
WORKS! I'm out of English words; I just run mandel.pbc in pdb
and it printed out such a cool Mandel bug or whatever(or maybe
even Leon Broca
Vladimir Lipskiy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bi-bi (~8 .. In itself io_15.pasm is okay. The problem(?) was
> that there wasn't close FOO before openning the same file
> for writing which the FOO file handle pointed to. The
> attachment fixes it.
Thanks, applied.
leo
Thanks, applied.
Simon
Index: io.ops
===
RCS file: /cvs/public/parrot/io.ops,v
retrieving revision 1.31
diff -u -r1.31 io.ops
--- io.ops 9 Aug 2003 07:22:20 - 1.31
+++ io.ops 11 Aug 2003 12:32:00 -
@@ -422,7 +422,7 @@
64bit tell:
Get the current
"Vladimir Lipskiy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Thanks for the testing
> t/pmc/io...NOK 3# Failed test (t/pmc/io.t at line 37)
> # got: 'fdopen failed
> # '
> # expected: 'ok
> # '
> t/pmc/io...NOK 4# Failed test (t/pmc/io.t at line 51)
> # got
> This is a missing implementation of fdopen on windows.
> Its not clear to me how this call should behave. PIO_win32_fdopen
> takes a Parrot_WIN32_Handle which is actually a void*.
To my mind the imlementation is fine.
> Using the numbers 0,1,2 in this call does not seem right
> here. Especially
> This is a missing implementation of fdopen on windows.
> Its not clear to me how this call should behave. PIO_win32_fdopen
> takes a Parrot_WIN32_Handle which is actually a void*.
Yup. I've alredy peeped in io.h, io_win32.c. And as soon as
I get more familiar with PIO, I'll try to say what the f
Thanks, applied.
Simon
12 matches
Mail list logo
