On Monday 06 August 2001 09:08 am, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> It could be that part of the "fixup" is to convert from bytes to wider
> ops, or something similar. If that's the case, I can patch the code and
> rerun it.
Okay. I rewrote the code from scratch. (Rev 2 is always better anyway.)
Same
On Mon, 06 Aug 2001 21:55:07 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>>But I do not agree that calculated jumps should be done in such a hard
>>way.
>
>Nothing hard about it, really.
I was referring to Hong Zhang's proposal, not yours.
--
Bart.
> Damian,
> You mentioned in E2 that the chomped property relies on the insep
> property of the filehandle (formerly $/). Can I extrapolate that
>$.
>$,
>$\
>$|
> will also be properties on filehandles? (How about
>$"
> for arrays?)
It's not
> More questions regarding the new 'given when' construct.
More answers (modulo Larry :-)
> 1) Is a 'when' clause required? Is it:
>
> [ LABEL: ] given ( expr_1 ) {
>when expr_2 : block
>[ when expr_3 : block ...]
>expr_n [;]
>
Dan suggested:
> The syntax for variable and value properties are going to be different, I
> think, I just can't remember what it's going to be. (I think the colon's
> involved, but isn't it always?)
I think you're now channelling my de specula, not Larry's de jure. :-)
In A2, Larry
I'm going on vacation soon, and I'd like to get a good book on writing
compilers--hopefully one that will help me when we actually start coding
Perl 6. Any suggestions? I have no formal education on compilers, and
I only know C, C++ and Perl (duh).
(If this is too off-topic, let me know.)
Than
> # >my $foo is const = 0 is true;
> # >
> # > $foo has the property const, while the value 0 in $foo has
> # > the property true.
> #
> # So, if I do
> #
> # my $foo is constant = new Counter(0);
> # $foo->increment # OK
>
> I think so.
Yep. Except the prop
David L. Nicol wrote:
> eval ${code}o;
Another brilliant idea from David Nicol!
However, I'm not keen on the syntax.
I'd rather see a different keyword. I'm thinking "eval1",
but I'm not very creative. :-/
--
John Porter
Science class should not end in tragedy.
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2001/6/8/11126/34098
Hi,
I can't find Larry's slides from TPC5 online anywhere. Is it just
me or what? :)
- ask
--
ask bjoern hansen, http://ask.netcetera.dk/ !try; do();
more than 100M impressions per day, http://valueclick.com
The Dragon Book is (AFAIK) still considered the definitive book on the
subject. It's called that because it has (or at least, had, for the
edition that I bought) a red dragon on the cover.
The official title is:
Compilers : Principles, Techniques, and Tools
by Alfred V. Aho, Ravi Sethi, Je
>The official title is:
>
>Compilers : Principles, Techniques, and Tools
>by Alfred V. Aho, Ravi Sethi, Jeffrey D. Ullman (Contributor)
>ISBN: 0201100886
>
>You can get it from Fatbrain:
>
>http://www1.fatbrain.com/asp/bookinfo/bookinfo.asp?theisbn=0201100886&vm=
>
or cheaper at Bookpool
At 06:06 PM 8/7/2001 -0700, Dave Storrs wrote:
>The Dragon Book is (AFAIK) still considered the definitive book on the
>subject. It's called that because it has (or at least, had, for the
>edition that I bought) a red dragon on the cover.
>
>The official title is:
>
>Compilers : Principles, Techn
> David L. Nicol wrote:
> > eval ${code}o;
>
> Another brilliant idea from David Nicol!
>
> However, I'm not keen on the syntax.
> I'd rather see a different keyword. I'm thinking "eval1",
> but I'm not very creative. :-/
]- what about :
qe//;# qe{};
OR
qo//
On Tue, 7 Aug 2001 09:27:43 -0400, John Porter wrote:
>David L. Nicol wrote:
>> eval ${code}o;
>
>Another brilliant idea from David Nicol!
Not really.
What I would like is an option to just *compile* a piece of perl code,
without executing it. This kinda works:
$coderef = eval "su
> There are a number of properties "built into" Perl 6. Nearly all of these
> properties don't make sense across the board - eg, a scalar won't have a
> dimension, a hash won't prompt, etc.
>
> So given the two different sets that you must consider (variable versus
> value, and
> "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
DS> Not that tricky. (And no, those aren't regex variables. I'm having
DS> LSI-11 Macro flashbacks here)
>>
>> wow, the macro-11 private/lexical labels! one of the very nice features
>> of macro-11 that is worth stealing (if perl d
On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> No, he's right. Not dirtying cache lines is pretty much always faster than
> dirtying them, and not twiddling with memory's faster than twiddling. And
> unfortunately we can't really do fully platform-dependent code, since it'll
> be the actual bytecode t
> "ST" == Sam Tregar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
ST> Lo tho we walk through the valley of the shadow of the JVM... Is
ST> anyone else nervous that we seem to be trying to replace GCC here?
ST> Is register allocation really something the Perl community has
ST> expertise in?
one more
At 12:41 PM 8/7/2001 -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
> > "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> DS> Not that tricky. (And no, those aren't regex variables. I'm having
> DS> LSI-11 Macro flashbacks here)
> >>
> >> wow, the macro-11 private/lexical labels! one of the very nice fe
At 12:53 PM 8/7/2001 -0400, Sam Tregar wrote:
>On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>
> > No, he's right. Not dirtying cache lines is pretty much always faster than
> > dirtying them, and not twiddling with memory's faster than twiddling. And
> > unfortunately we can't really do fully platform-
At 11:10 AM 8/7/2001 +0200, Bart Lateur wrote:
>On Mon, 06 Aug 2001 21:55:07 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>
> >>But I do not agree that calculated jumps should be done in such a hard
> >>way.
> >
> >Nothing hard about it, really.
>
>I was referring to Hong Zhang's proposal, not yours.
Ah, OK. I ten
At 09:40 AM 8/7/2001 -0400, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
>On Monday 06 August 2001 09:08 am, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> > It could be that part of the "fixup" is to convert from bytes to wider
> > ops, or something similar. If that's the case, I can patch the code and
> > rerun it.
>
>Okay. I rewrote
At 11:55 PM 8/6/2001 -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
> > "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> DS> Nothing hard about it, really. We'll see either:
>
> DS>branch $10
>
> DS> or
>
> DS>store I12, $10
> DS>branch I12
>
> DS> Not that tricky. (And no, those aren't
I don't think anyone mentioned this before here...
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 19:43:53 -0700
From: Neil Schemenauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Python-Dev] Intel's Open Runtime Platform (ORP)
I just saw this while updating my Debian mac
On Tuesday 07 August 2001 10:48 am, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> BTW, can I get the source to the tests? I'd like to give them a whirl to
> see how the Alphas deal with the various alternatives.
http://members.home.com/bcwarno/Perl6/spool/opcode_test.tgz
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
26 matches
Mail list logo
