The Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 2005-05-24
Note to self: It's generally not a good idea to go installing Tiger on
the day you return from holiday. It's especially not a good idea to fail
to check that it didn't completely and utterly radish your Postfix
configuration. And you
The Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 20030831
Welcome to this week's Perl 6 summary. This week, for one week only I'm
going to break with a long established summary tradition. No, that
doesn't mean I won't be mentioning Leon Brocard this week. Nope, this
week
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Don't trace system areas in sweep ops
> through holes in the C stack (hmm... if anyone has a good drawing of
> this?)).
I don't know if its a good one, but my original posting about that
problem had some ASCII graphics (in this thread):
Subj
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Approaching Python
> Discussions (and coding) of the Parrot implementation of Python
> continued this week. Michal Wallace is working on taking a preexisting
> (but incomplete, it's a proof of concept only) python parse tree ->
Wow, after re
Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 20030703
"Ooh look, it's another Perl 6 summary. Doesn't that man ever take a
holiday?"
"I think he took one last month."
"Is it in Esperanto this week?"
"I don't think so."
"Does Leon Brocard get a mention?"
"It certainly looks th
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Okay, okay, PONIE really stands for 'Perl On New Internal Engine'.
That's that what they say. Actually it was: "PONIEPONIE":
"Perl5 Obsoletes Nasty Internals Entirely:
Parrot Occupies Numerous Interpreters Everywhere"
But that was to bulky. Or too many
Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 20030727
Welcome to another in the ongoing series of Perl 6 summaries in which
your faintly frazzled summarizer attempts to find a native speaker of
Esperanto to translate this opening paragraph in honour of the huge
amount of money (1371 Euros) ra
The Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 20030615
Welcome to the last Perl 6 Summary of my first year of summarizing. If I
were a better writer (or if I weren't listening with half an ear to
Damian telling YAPC about Perl 6 in case anything's changed) then this
summary might well be a
The Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 20030601
Another Monday, another Perl 6 Summary. Does this man never take a
holiday? (Yes, but only to go to Perl conferences this year, how did
that happen?)
We start with the internals list as usual.
More on timely destruction
The dis
Piers Cawley writes:
> is static?
> Discussion of static/state variables continued. Arcadi Shehter wondered
> if it made sense to attach "but" properties to closures. I confess I
> didn't really understand what he was driving at. Austin Hastings and
Actually, I was confused , thi
On Monday, March 31, 2003, at 10:15 AM, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 10:09:43AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
I'm still hoping rather desperately for a if-uninitialized op in
general, even if only for hashes, because the difference between
"present but undefined" and "not pr
On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 10:09:43AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
> I'm still hoping rather desperately for a if-uninitialized op in
> general, even if only for hashes, because the difference between
> "present but undefined" and "not present" is rather crucial for some
> common algorithms.
Ca
On Monday, March 31, 2003, at 07:39 AM, Piers Cawley wrote:
Argument initializations
Michael Lazzaro summarized the various different and proposed
assignment
operators available in Perl 6, including a proposed "::=" for 'only
assign to uninitialized variables'. Michael wondered how
The Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 20030330
Welcome once again to the gallimaufry that is a Perl 6 summary.
Unfettered this week by the presence of feline distraction we plunge
straight into the crystal clear waters of perk6-internals.
Iterator proof of concept
People must re
--- Uri Guttman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "PC" == Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> PC> To do that you need to declare the parameter with "is
> PC> copy". Uri noted that he really should keep his finger off
> the
> PC> send button until he's read the whole 'm
> "PC" == Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
PC> To do that you need to declare the parameter with "is
PC> copy". Uri noted that he really should keep his finger off the
PC> send button until he's read the whole 'megilla', whatever one
PC> of those is.
it is appr
The Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 20030316
Spring is in the air, the Apocalypse is here (or imminent, depending on
which sense of the word 'Apocalypse' you are using). We'll start with
perl6-internals as usual, before bracing ourselves for the increased
volume and ploughing on
TLA = Three Letter Acronymn
- Original Message -
From: "Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Leopold Toetsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 1
--- Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Piers Cawley wrote:
> > Coroutines end and DFG
> > Nobody explained what DFG stands for.
>
> It's a commonly used TLA standing for Data Flow Graph, which
> accompanies the CFG (Control Flow Graph). Both are necessary
> for register allocation
Piers Cawley wrote:
Coroutines end and DFG
Nobody explained what DFG stands for.
It's a commonly used TLA standing for Data Flow Graph, which accompanies
the CFG (Control Flow Graph). Both are necessary for register allocation.
leo
The Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 20030309
Ooh look, it's another of those Perl 6 Summaries where Piers tries to
work a gratuitous reference to Leon Brocard into a summary of what's
been happening to the Perl 6 development process this week.
As tradition dictates, we'll start
Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 8:54 AM +0100 2/28/03, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
I see that limitation. But currently we have a high overhead JIT. The
problem is not so much program run time, but load time.
Damn. Okay, what sort of metadata would be appropriate to aid in this?
If it means having the assem
At 8:54 AM +0100 2/28/03, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
... And with that limitation, I'd rather have a lower-overhead JIT
with a win for the shorter programs than a high-overhead one with a
win for long-running programs.
I see that limitation. But currently we have a high overhead
Dan Sugalski wrote:
... And with that
limitation, I'd rather have a lower-overhead JIT with a win for the
shorter programs than a high-overhead one with a win for long-running
programs.
I see that limitation. But currently we have a high overhead JIT. The
problem is not so much program run ti
At 12:41 PM -0500 2/26/03, Jason Gloudon wrote:
On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 09:31:39AM -0800, Sean O'Rourke wrote:
Dan -- you might be interested in
http://www.usenix.org/events/javavm02/chen_m.html (if you have a USENIX
Research wants to be free:
http://www-hydra.stanford.edu/publications/JVM02.pd
On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 09:31:39AM -0800, Sean O'Rourke wrote:
> Dan -- you might be interested in
> http://www.usenix.org/events/javavm02/chen_m.html (if you have a USENIX
Research wants to be free:
http://www-hydra.stanford.edu/publications/JVM02.pdf
--
Jason
First off, thanks to our relentless..., er, tireless summarizer for
continuing to digest and clarify our wandering discussion.
On Tue, 25 Feb 2003, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Using IMCC as JIT optimizer
> Apparently, Leo Tötsch finds it unbearable that 'optimized compiled C is
> still faster
The Perl 6 summary for the week ending 20030223
Another week, another Perl 6 Summary, in which you'll find gratuitous
mentions of Leon Brocard, awed descriptions of what Leopold Tötsch got
up to and maybe even a summary of what's been happening in Perl 6 design
and development.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...but Leo seem to think that...
I agree with the policy of referring to Leo in the plural.
Regards,
-- Gregor
We thank you
leo, me, myself & I,
Leopold
> ...but Leo seem to think that...
I agree with the policy of referring to Leo in the plural.
Regards,
-- Gregor
The Perl 6 summary for the week ending 20030216
Welcome to the all new, entirely unaltered, all singing, all dancing
Perl 6 summary. Your beacon of reliability in the crazy world that is
Perl 6 design and development.
Another quiet week. Even quieter than last week in fact, unless
At 11:40 PM +0100 2/14/03, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
The challenge system is x86 Linux with GCC, FWIW.
Nice ;-)
And not even my choice, but who am I to argue, right? :)
--
Dan
--"it's like this"---
Dan Sugalski wrote:
The challenge system is x86 Linux with GCC, FWIW.
Nice ;-)
leo
At 9:02 PM + 2/14/03, Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 03:45:20PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
The challenge system is x86 Linux with GCC, FWIW. I have this nagging
feeling we'll be able to muster something that'll run on it... :)
Are we free to use whichever runops core we fe
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 03:45:20PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> The challenge system is x86 Linux with GCC, FWIW. I have this nagging
> feeling we'll be able to muster something that'll run on it... :)
Are we free to use whichever runops core we feel like?
Nicholas Clark
At 4:17 PM +0100 2/11/03, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The 2004 Performance challenge
Dan announced that he'd made a bet with Guido van Rossum that Parrot
would be faster at executing a pure python benchmark
You missed the pie as part of the penalty, though tha
Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> The 2004 Performance challenge
>> Dan announced that he'd made a bet with Guido van Rossum that Parrot
>> would be faster at executing a pure python benchmark
>
>
> [ ... ]
>
>
>> For some reason nobody comme
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The 2004 Performance challenge
Dan announced that he'd made a bet with Guido van Rossum that Parrot
would be faster at executing a pure python benchmark
[ ... ]
For some reason nobody commented on this.
The CGP runloop was the comment ;-)
Thanks f
The Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 20030209
Welcome to the latest Perl 6 summary, your handy cut out and keep guide
to the goings on in the crazy world of Perl 6 design and development.
It's been a rather quiet week this week; only 75 messages in
perl6-internals and a mere 57
On Tue, 2003-01-28 at 06:34, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Compiling to Parrot
> K Stol is looking for a final project for his Bachelor's degree and
> would like to implement some language targeting Parrot and asked for
> suggestions. Simon Wistow suggested PHP or Lua, Leon Brocard suggested
The Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 20030126
Welcome to the first Perl 6 summary of the new 'Copious Free Time
enabled' era, which should mean that these summaries will get mailed out
on Monday evening from now on.
We start, as usual, with perl6-internals
The eval patch
L
The Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 20030119
Summary time again, damn but those tuits are hard to round up. Guess,
what? perl6-internals comes first. 141 messages this week versus the
language list's 143.
Objects (again)
Objects were still very much on everyone's mind as the d
On Tuesday, December 24, 2002, at 02:55 AM, Piers Cawley wrote:
Apparently part of the problem is that the undef function isn't
fully defined.
Well, isn't that sort-of the point?
:-)
David
--
David Wheeler AIM: dwTheory
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Perl Summary for the week ending 20021222
Hello, good morning and welcome to the Christmas edition of the Perl 6
summary. For some reason I have convinced myself to sit here on
Christmas Eve writing a summary for all you crazy kids out there who
hang on my every word. Plus, it b
The Perl Summary for the week ending 20021215
Hi, and welcome to the first summary prepared on my shiny second hand
TiBook (no, it wasn't a gift from a grateful summary reader, it was
bought from a friend who was upgrading, gifts from grateful summary
readers are, of course, still w
The Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 20021117
"Oh! my ears and whiskers, I'm late!"
It's 0650, it's 20021120 and I've only just started writing the summary.
Call me lazy, call me a shirker, call me anything you damn well please,
just don't interrupt me while I'm writing this.
Deborah Ariel Pickett wrote:
> Assuming that semicolon is no longer going to be a supercomma in these
> situations, does that mean that we C addicts can have C back to do
> the kinds of loops that we mean when we say "for loops"?
I hope not.
> I really don't much like the C keyword.
>
> for (
> Supercomma!
> [snip]
> Larry then confessed that he was thinking of changing the declaration of
> parallel for loops from:
> for @a ; @b ; @c - $a ; $b ; $c {...}
> to something like:
> for parallel(@a, @b, @c) - $a, $b, $c {...}
Assuming that semicolon is no longer goi
Piers Cawley writes:
>
> FMTWYENTK about ":="
> Bravely declining to expand the acronym in his subject, arcardi posted a
> summary of his current understanding of the behavior of ":=", the
its "far more then what you ever need to know"
and after Damian Conway answer it becomes JEOWY
The Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 20021110
Far off in distant Newark a figure, muttering something about `Leon
Brocard', shambles across a railway bridge and makes its way into a
waiting room. Time passes. After a while, a train arrives and the figure
shambles on board, takes i
50 matches
Mail list logo
