At 2:30 AM + 4/20/02, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
>According to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski):
>>At the moment, we don't have to support cascading lexical
>>scratchpads--since we know at compile time which variables we're
>>accessing and where they come from, we can install trampoline entries
>>
According to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski):
>At the moment, we don't have to support cascading lexical
>scratchpads--since we know at compile time which variables we're
>accessing and where they come from, we can install trampoline entries
>in the current scope's scratchpad and not have to s
Also slowing down 0.0.99 so that 0.1.0 has atleast 2-3 times speed up over 0.0.99 :"))
|I don't see "World Domination" or "Nervous Breakdown" in there anywhere.
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 05:43:01PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 10:16 PM +0100 4/17/02, Dave Mitchell wrote:
> >On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 04:57:21PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> >> At 9:48 PM +0100 4/17/02, Dave Mitchell wrote:
> >> >On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 04:34:12PM -0400, Simon Glover wrote:
At 10:16 PM +0100 4/17/02, Dave Mitchell wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 04:57:21PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>> At 9:48 PM +0100 4/17/02, Dave Mitchell wrote:
>> >On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 04:34:12PM -0400, Simon Glover wrote:
>> >> I thought lexicals were going to live in a symbol table now?
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 04:57:21PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 9:48 PM +0100 4/17/02, Dave Mitchell wrote:
> >On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 04:34:12PM -0400, Simon Glover wrote:
> >> I thought lexicals were going to live in a symbol table now? In which
> >> case, they're definitely going to depe
On Wed, 17 Apr 2002, Dave Mitchell wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 04:34:12PM -0400, Simon Glover wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 17 Apr 2002, Brent Dax wrote:
> >
> > > Dan Sugalski:
> > > # Okay, here are the milestones. Each is worth a point release. If we
> > > # manage to take them in this order, g
At 9:48 PM +0100 4/17/02, Dave Mitchell wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 04:34:12PM -0400, Simon Glover wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 17 Apr 2002, Brent Dax wrote:
>>
>> > Dan Sugalski:
>> > # Okay, here are the milestones. Each is worth a point release. If we
>> > # manage to take them in this order, g
At 4:37 PM -0400 4/17/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 03:27:51PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>> Okay, here are the milestones. Each is worth a point release. If we
> > manage to take them in this order, great. :)
>
>I don't see "World Domination" or "Nervous Breakdown" in th
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 04:34:12PM -0400, Simon Glover wrote:
>
> On Wed, 17 Apr 2002, Brent Dax wrote:
>
> > Dan Sugalski:
> > # Okay, here are the milestones. Each is worth a point release. If we
> > # manage to take them in this order, great. :)
> >
> > Rough dependency tree:
> >
> > Arrays
>
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 03:27:51PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> Okay, here are the milestones. Each is worth a point release. If we
> manage to take them in this order, great. :)
>
> *) Working arrays
>
> *) Working hashes
>
> *) Regular expressions
>
> *) Symbol tables
>
> *) Method calls
>
On Wed, 17 Apr 2002, Brent Dax wrote:
> Dan Sugalski:
> # Okay, here are the milestones. Each is worth a point release. If we
> # manage to take them in this order, great. :)
>
> Rough dependency tree:
>
> Arrays
> Regular expressions (backreference storage)
> Parser (probabl
Dan Sugalski:
# Okay, here are the milestones. Each is worth a point release. If we
# manage to take them in this order, great. :)
Rough dependency tree:
Arrays
Regular expressions (backreference storage)
Parser (probably)
Lexicals (probably, though could be a ha
13 matches
Mail list logo
