On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 12:48, Michal Wallace wrote:
> It does seem like there are some snags getting
> languages to talk to each other, even with the
> calling conventions, but even so, I'm even more
> convinced now that a generic, overridable
> code-generator is the way to go.
>
> It seems to me that
- Original Message -
From: "Joseph Ryan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Michal Wallace" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "K Stol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 12:24 AM
Subject: Re: generic code generator? [
Michal Wallace wrote:
On Sun, 3 Aug 2003, K Stol wrote:
What do you think? Want to try squishing pirate/python
and pirate/lua together? :)
Yeah, I like the idea. Let's try this out.
Well, I finished reading your report[1] and
posted some of my (rather unorganized) thoughts
up at
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> The original thought was to use the new perl 6 grammar engine/code
> to do this, but I think it'll be a while before that's ready to go.
I think perl6 is definitely the way to go, once it's ready.
BTW, what's the deal with Bundle::Perl6? I tried installi
At 11:09 PM -0400 8/4/03, Michal Wallace wrote:
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003, Stephen Thorne wrote:
Thus the code generator is best suited to be in a language that can
be run from within the parrot machine, otherwise statements like
'eval()' would not be possible without binding parrot to a
non-portable
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003, Stephen Thorne wrote:
> > It seems to me that if we want to maximize the
> > number of languages using it, the generic
> > compiler shouldn't depend on anything but
> > C and parrot... But until we get it working,
> > I'd like to stick to a dynamic language like
> > python/perl
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003, Joseph Ryan wrote:
> >Okay, I don't have a good syntax in mind yet,
> >the point is it's a template language and you
> >can subclass/override/extend the template.
> >Maybe there's no syntax and it just uses
> >cleanly coded classes in some oo language.
> >Or perl6 with it's g
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > haskell_parser -> ast -> pirate -> parrot_code --> imcc -> pbc
> > ^
> > |
> > parrot_code__templates
> >
> >
> >S
At 1:35 PM -0400 8/5/03, Michal Wallace wrote:
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003, Joseph Ryan wrote:
>Okay, I don't have a good syntax in mind yet,
>the point is it's a template language and you
>can subclass/override/extend the template.
>Maybe there's no syntax and it just uses
>cleanly coded classes in s
On Sun, 3 Aug 2003, K Stol wrote:
> > What do you think? Want to try squishing pirate/python
> > and pirate/lua together? :)
>
> Yeah, I like the idea. Let's try this out.
Well, I finished reading your report[1] and
posted some of my (rather unorganized) thoughts
up at [2]
It does seem like t
On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 19:25, Michal Wallace wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, K Stol wrote:
> Really, there's a ton of overlap between the various
> "high level" languages that parrot wants to support.
> Maybe we could put together a generic code generator
> that everyone could use? Obviously, it would hav
On Sun, 3 Aug 2003, K Stol wrote:
> At this moment, I'm looking at a new version of Lua, the previous
> 'pirate' compiled (well, sort of :-) Lua 4 Lua 5 has some features,
> such as coroutines (If I remembered well) and all kinds of neat
> stuff for which Parrot has built-in support (and it droppe
- Original Message -
From: "Michal Wallace" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "K Stol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2003 2:25 AM
Subject: generic code generator? [was: subroutines and python status]
> On Fri, 1 Au
On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, K Stol wrote:
> > From: "Leon Brocard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
...
> > I don't like things becoming dead-ends. How much work do you think
> > it'd be to extend it some more and update it to latest Lua?
...
> 2: I misdesigned the code generator; that is, at the point where I
> could
On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 11:04 PM +0200 7/31/03, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> >Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> You mind submitting a patch to put this in the languages/pirate
>
> >I'd appreciate that very much. Pie-thon, here we come ...
>
> As would I. If you're willin
At 11:04 PM +0200 7/31/03, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You mind submitting a patch to put this in the languages/pirate
I'd appreciate that very much. Pie-thon, here we come ...
As would I. If you're willing, Michal, we can check it in and get you
CVS repository
- Original Message -
From: "Leon Brocard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 1:30 AM
Subject: Re: subroutines and python status
> K Stol sent the following bits through the ether:
>
> > Actually, I named my li
K Stol sent the following bits through the ether:
> Actually, I named my little project "pirate" (s.
> http://members.home.nl/joeijoei/parrot for this) already, but it's a bit of
> a dead end already (although I learnt much of it), so I don't mind.
Quick, we need more parrot jokes...
I don't li
- Original Message -
From: "Melvin Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Luke Palmer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 3:33 PM
Subject: Re: subroutines and python status
> At 01:51 PM
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You mind submitting a patch to put this in the languages/pirate
I'd appreciate that very much. Pie-thon, here we come ...
Speaking of adding new projects to languages, I have a partially complete
JVM->PIR translator done. It's comp
At 01:51 PM 7/31/2003 -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
You mind submitting a patch to put this in the languages/pirate
directory of the parrot distro? I'd like to stay up to date, and
probably do some work (as, I imagine, would others).
I'd like to officially complain that "pirate" is a cooler name than
At 02:54 PM 7/31/2003 -0400, Michal Wallace wrote:
Actually, between imcc and the python compiler
module, it's not nearly as hard as I thought it
would be. So far, I think the parrot version is
actually a lot simpler than the python compiler,
just because imcc is doing so much of the work.
Leo and
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You mind submitting a patch to put this in the languages/pirate
I'd appreciate that very much. Pie-thon, here we come ...
> Luke
leo
Michal Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> .sub __start__
>call __main__
> .end
> .sub __main__
> .sub _f
> print ":)"
> ret
>.end
>$I0 = addr _f
>print $I0
>end
> .end
> That prints ":)", followed by the address,
No, can't imagine that:
$ parrot -o- pir
> > One of my questions is, why do you make so many PerlNums when there
> > isn't a trace of a floating point number to be found...?
>
> Because I didn't read the docs that said PerlNum means "float". :)
> I'll switch it to PerlInt (or maybe int?) later...
Yeah, all your auxillary data; i.e. th
On 31 Jul 2003, Luke Palmer wrote:
> > It now runs amk's euclid.py perfectly now.
> > Do we have a way to compare the speed vs python? :)
> We just modify it to repeat 100,000 times or so, and compare that way.
Oh, duh. :)
> Which I did. Parrot comes in about 3x slower than python on euclid.
>
On Thu, 31 Jul 2003, Brent Royal-Gordon wrote:
> Michal Wallace:
> > I can store all my subroutine definitions in
> > a list or something and then dump them out
> > after the "__main__" routine.
>
> That seems to be the way to do it, speaking as someone who's working
> on a Perl 5-to-PIL converter
On Thu, 31 Jul 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> You can do that:
> .sub __main__
>bsr _main
>end
> .end
> .sub _main
...
> So you have just to emit code, to call your real main at the beginning.
Well that worked, and even let me get rid of the
endsub label:
.sub __start__
call __main
> Hey all,
>
> I'm trying to get functions working
> in python, and I'm not sure the best way
> to do this.
>
> What seems natural to me is to define
> subroutines in the middle of the code
> as I walk the parse tree:
>
> .sub __main__
> goto endsub
> .sub _f
> print ":(\n"
>
Michal Wallace wrote:
Hey all,
What seems natural to me is to define
subroutines in the middle of the code
as I walk the parse tree:
You can do that:
.sub __main__
bsr _main
end
.end
.sub _main
.sub _f
print ":)\n"
ret
.end
.sub _g
print ";-)\n"
r
Michal Wallace:
> I can store all my subroutine definitions in
> a list or something and then dump them out
> after the "__main__" routine. Is that the
> right approach? It seems strange to me,
> but I'm new at this.
That seems to be the way to do it, speaking as someone who's working on a
Perl 5-
Hey all,
I'm trying to get functions working
in python, and I'm not sure the best way
to do this.
What seems natural to me is to define
subroutines in the middle of the code
as I walk the parse tree:
.sub __main__
goto endsub
.sub _f
print ":(\n"
ret
.end
endsub:
32 matches
Mail list logo
