Re: PMC pdd's in

2002-05-20 Thread Michael Fischer
On Fri, May 17, Nicholas Clark wrote: > On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 08:37:32PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > Pssst. Brent. Don't tell anyone, but ~0 *is* -1... :) > > $ perl -le 'print ~0' > 4294967295 > $ perl -le 'print -1' > -1 > > What language were we talking about? :-) $ perl -e 'printf "%d

Re: PMC pdd's in

2002-05-17 Thread Nicholas Clark
On Fri, May 17, 2002 at 03:27:44PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > At 8:04 PM +0100 5/17/02, Nicholas Clark wrote: > >On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 08:37:32PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > >> Pssst. Brent. Don't tell anyone, but ~0 *is* -1... :) > > > >$ perl -le 'print ~0' > >4294967295 > >$ perl -le 'prin

Re: PMC pdd's in

2002-05-17 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 8:04 PM +0100 5/17/02, Nicholas Clark wrote: >On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 08:37:32PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: >> Pssst. Brent. Don't tell anyone, but ~0 *is* -1... :) > >$ perl -le 'print ~0' >4294967295 >$ perl -le 'print -1' >-1 > >What language were we talking about? :-) C, of course. Perl's

Re: PMC pdd's in

2002-05-17 Thread Nicholas Clark
On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 08:37:32PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > Pssst. Brent. Don't tell anyone, but ~0 *is* -1... :) $ perl -le 'print ~0' 4294967295 $ perl -le 'print -1' -1 What language were we talking about? :-) [Actually, this is a big area of :-( Because perl programmers are used to wr

RE: PMC pdd's in

2002-05-17 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 9:22 PM -0700 5/16/02, Brent Dax wrote: >Dan Sugalski: ># At 5:28 PM -0700 5/16/02, Brent Dax wrote: ># >Dan Sugalski: ># ># Okay, I've checked in the final changes to this edit of ># PDD 2, the # ># >vtable pdd. Tine to rip into it^W^W^Wexamine it closely. :) ># > ># >I guess I'm first. ># > >

RE: PMC pdd's in

2002-05-16 Thread Brent Dax
Dan Sugalski: # At 5:28 PM -0700 5/16/02, Brent Dax wrote: # >Dan Sugalski: # ># Okay, I've checked in the final changes to this edit of # PDD 2, the # # >vtable pdd. Tine to rip into it^W^W^Wexamine it closely. :) # > # >I guess I'm first. # > # >I think the PARROT_TRUE/PARROT_FALSE thing is a

RE: PMC pdd's in

2002-05-16 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 5:28 PM -0700 5/16/02, Brent Dax wrote: >Dan Sugalski: ># Okay, I've checked in the final changes to this edit of PDD 2, the ># vtable pdd. Tine to rip into it^W^W^Wexamine it closely. :) > >I guess I'm first. > >I think the PARROT_TRUE/PARROT_FALSE thing is a Really Bad Idea. I'm not thrilled

RE: PMC pdd's in

2002-05-16 Thread Brent Dax
Dan Sugalski: # Okay, I've checked in the final changes to this edit of PDD 2, the # vtable pdd. Tine to rip into it^W^W^Wexamine it closely. :) I guess I'm first. I think the PARROT_TRUE/PARROT_FALSE thing is a Really Bad Idea. I understand that we need a way to indicate exceptions. However,