Re: Perl6 the platform-dependent bits...

At 09:08 PM 10/24/00 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote: >On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 02:52:53PM -0500, Garrett Goebel wrote: > > > It's a good idea, but it really Isn't There Yet. > > > > Fair enough... > >Hey, I'm not Dan. There should have been big tags around that >previous mail. Luckily for me, I am. (I

RE: Perl6 the platform-dependent bits...

From: John Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Garrett Goebel wrote: > > > > I'm sure you won't be surprised by this, but I recall John > > Porter as being a C-- fan. Now why is he being mysteriously silent? > > Nope, wasn't me. Never heard of it until someone brought it > up earlier. I do

Re: Perl6 the platform-dependent bits...

On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 02:52:53PM -0500, Garrett Goebel wrote: > > It's a good idea, but it really Isn't There Yet. > > Fair enough... Hey, I'm not Dan. There should have been big tags around that previous mail. -- God gave man two ears and one tongue so that we listen twice as much as we s

Re: Perl6 the platform-dependent bits...

Garrett Goebel wrote: > > I'm sure you won't be surprised by this, but I recall John > Porter as being a C-- fan. Now why is he being mysteriously silent? Nope, wasn't me. Never heard of it until someone brought it up earlier. I do admit, it sounds intriguing. > I just wanted to mention it, a

RE: Perl6 the platform-dependent bits...

From: Simon Cozens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 12:54:26PM -0500, Garrett Goebel wrote: > > Everyone seems to have their favorite laundry list of the > > failings of C, and an accompanying list of complex and/or > > fragile solutions. > > I'm coming to the rapid concl

Re: Perl6 the platform-dependent bits...

On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 12:54:26PM -0500, Garrett Goebel wrote: > Everyone seems to have their favorite laundry list of the failings of C, and > an accompanying list of complex and/or fragile solutions. I'm coming to the rapid conclusion that C-- is yours. (complicated and fragile solution.) Whi

RE: Perl6 the platform-dependent bits...

From: Garrett Goebel > From: Dan Sugalski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > (Though if someone comes up with a way to make the > > platform-dependent bits really small and isolated I'm all for it) > [mention of C--] > > From: Dan Sugalski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > I do

Re: Perl6 the platform-dependent bits...

At 10:22 AM 10/24/00 +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote: >On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 01:11:21AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > I like the idea of returning multiple results in multiple registers. Pity > > nothing on the planet could link to us if we did that... :( > >not quite. On the ARM compiler [targeted

Re: Perl6 the platform-dependent bits...

On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 01:11:21AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > I like the idea of returning multiple results in multiple registers. Pity > nothing on the planet could link to us if we did that... :( not quite. On the ARM compiler [targeted at arm chips :-)] if you declare a function __value_in_

Re: Perl6 the platform-dependent bits...

At 03:28 PM 10/23/00 -0500, Garrett Goebel wrote: >From: Dan Sugalski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > (Though if someone comes up with a way to make the > > platform-dependent bits really small and isolated I'm all for it) > >Hmm... I'm 99.9% ignorant on this subject, but