On Mon, 24 Apr 2017 15:32:33 -0700, alex.jakime...@gmail.com wrote:
> Run this:
> perl6 --target=ast -e '^…'
>
> And among normal lines from the output you will see these messages:
>
> Oops!!! Cannot invoke this object (REPR: P6opaque; NQPMu)
>
> I don'
al lines from the output you will see these messages:
Oops!!! Cannot invoke this object (REPR: P6opaque; NQPMu)
I don't think it should happen.
Full output here:
- QAST::CompUnit :W :UNIT
[pre_deserialize]
- QAST::Stmt
- QAST::Stmt
- QAST::Op(loadbytecode)
:
M S16-io.pod
Log Message:
---
Oops, fix wrong merge
:
M S16-io.pod
Log Message:
---
Oops, forgot one Testable -> FileTestable
:
M S11-modules.pod
Log Message:
---
Oops, "author" is not part of META.info
-concurrency.pod
Log Message:
---
[S17] oops, forgot a dash
Let me just dash back and fix that underscore.
Looks like the failed tests are due to a problem uploading the
reports, not with anything inside Parrot itself. I'll see if I can
figure out who can fix that.
more than a fix.
Is there an RT ticket open that addresses this issue? I didn't see
anything matching "barrier"; Or, is this perhaps waiting to be
addressed by a future PDD?
The only ticket that I'm aware of is RT#39988, which started several
related discussions i
2008/3/10 Bob Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>From: "Will Coleda" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 19:43:58 -0500
>
>
>[oops; continuation 0xb6926320 of type 22 is trying to jump from
>runloop 15008 to runloop 1]
>
>B
From: "Will Coleda" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 19:43:58 -0500
[oops; continuation 0xb6926320 of type 22 is trying to jump from
runloop 15008 to runloop 1]
Before I file a bug report on the tcl code that exposes this
faux-warning[1], I wanted to
[oops; continuation 0xb6926320 of type 22 is trying to jump from
runloop 15008 to runloop 1]
Before I file a bug report on the tcl code that exposes this
faux-warning[1], I wanted to double check: Is this an issue anymore
after the recent scheduler/task/event loop fixes? (The warning comes
from
apologies for the top post in my previous reply. didn't realize all that
error output was down there! :-P
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This time fer sure
Since you're using a version of Gnus that supports it, you will want
this in your .gnus:
(setq mml-insert-mime-headers-always t)
Gnus and ezmlm-idx don't play nice together without it (it's all
ezmlm-idx's fault though, but good luck
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I knew I forgot something in my last post...
Still:
EÄttätschmentMissin
leo
parrotunit.tar.gz
Description: Binary data
I knew I forgot something in my last post...
If you unpack this in your parrot directory you'll get
library/parrotunit.imc
library/TestCase.imc
library/TestResult.imc
library/WasRun.imc
t/test.imc
Go to the parrot directory and, do ./parrot t/test.imc and the tests
will run. Annoyingly, everyt
In my last commit I forgot to remove makefiles/root.in from the check in
list - and worse, I've checked it out immediately - so that my original
is gone.
If it doesn't work please undo the changes to makefiles/root.in or leave
it - lets just see, how its goes.
leo
# New Ticket Created by Leopold Toetsch
# Please include the string: [perl #16838]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=16838 >
Hi,
during hacking on imcc and testing with life.p6 I found wrong core.ops
of type
On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 10:44:09PM +0200, Jaen Saul wrote:
> make distclean should clean everything so ignore my point about leaving the
> CVS directories :)
Uhm, it does clean everything. If I've coded it right, (cough cough) it
deletes everything that's not in MANIFEST.
--
``Perl is the succe
make distclean should clean everything so ignore my point about leaving the
CVS directories :)
And please leave me a message when the makefiles are fixed so I can delete
my custom version of makefile.in.
-Jaen Saul
oops -- posted to perl6-language by mistake...
sorry,
Ed
Oops. Forgot a few points. I said that you should give me the courtesy of
responding to all of my points, and
> I think we're rapidly approaching "agree to disagree" territory here.
No we are not. If you come
21 matches
Mail list logo