Ron Blaschke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have attached a proposal for a TODO.win32 for your consideration.
Thanks, applied.
leo
On Tue, 4 May 2004 09:11:00 +0200, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>> Is there anything specific that is known to be broken/not yet implemented
>> on Win32? Anything else I can help with?
>
> One more thing comes to my mind. That's dynamic loading of classes and
> bytecode (dynclasses/ and dynoplibs/). W
Ron Blaschke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there anything specific that is known to be broken/not yet implemented
> on Win32? Anything else I can help with?
One more thing comes to my mind. That's dynamic loading of classes and
bytecode (dynclasses/ and dynoplibs/). Win32 needs AFAIK much more
Ron Blaschke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there anything specific that is known to be broken/not yet implemented
> on Win32? Anything else I can help with?
Almost all implemented except: threads, events, signals, sockets :)
Seriously, I think, we first need an event model for Win32.
Parrot o
On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 12:52:20 +0200, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> There is no 'official' Win32 maintainer. I'd be glad if I could add a
> line to RESPONSIBLE_PARTIES.
Though I don't consider myself a Win32 maintainer (porter?), as I'm way too
inexperienced with Parrot, I'd sure like to work on it.
Is
Ron Blaschke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Here's a first tentative test result on win32, with VC 7.1 and
>> nmake, ICU 2.8 (win32 binary build). Is any of this unexpected?
>> Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed
>> --
> Here's a first tentative test result on win32, with VC 7.1 and
> nmake, ICU 2.8 (win32 binary build). Is any of this unexpected?
> Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed
> ---
> t\pmc\perlnum.t1
Hi,
Here's a first tentative test result on win32, with VC 7.1 and
nmake, ICU 2.8 (win32 binary build). Is any of this unexpected?
i386 JIT CPU
.dll SO extension
# Failed test (t\pmc\perlnum.t at line 690)
# got: '0
# 0.00
# '
# expected: '0
# -0.00
# '
# Looks like you f
