On Sun, Dec 23, 2001 at 01:58:32AM -0500, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 22, 2001 at 09:20:08PM -0800, Brent Dax wrote:
> > I do think that we should get rid of '!symbol' and especially
> > '/regex/'; they seem like an unnecessary complication.
>
> Yeah, chuck 'em. It would be interesti
On Sat, Dec 22, 2001 at 07:47:31PM -0500, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> I've rearranged the proposed features a bit to put the long objections
> at the bottom.
>
> Brent Dax wrote:
> > I've been thinking about improvements that could be made to Exporter for
> > Perl 6.
> > 3. Warnings about conflic
On Mon, Dec 24, 2001 at 01:11:21PM +, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> > > 4. For modules, saying 'use Exporter' should be enough to get import.
> > >If you don't want Exporter's import(), just C.
> >
> > Very nice. Exporter::Lite does just that.
>
> What actually stops us retrofitting that onto
On Mon, Dec 24, 2001 at 04:22:33PM +, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> > Also it would cause "subroutine redefined" warnings in this sort of
> > code:
> >
> > use Exporter;
> > sub import {
> > ...
> > Exporter::export_to_level(...);
> > }
>
> Not if it's in EXPORT_OK, sur
On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 12:03:51AM +, Tom Hughes wrote:
> It looks like it is going to need some work before it can work for
> other instruction sets though, at least for RISC systems where the
> operands are typically encoded with the opcode as part of a single
> word and the range of immedi
I think we should leave all that for an optimizer.
Daniel Grunblatt.
On Mon, 24 Dec 2001, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 12:03:51AM +, Tom Hughes wrote:
>
> > It looks like it is going to need some work before it can work for
> > other instruction sets though, at least for
Oh, and by the BTW,
I already tried you fastest example last week and got 50x speed up, but
that's works only for mops, so ...
Daniel Grunblatt.
On Mon, 24 Dec 2001, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 12:03:51AM +, Tom Hughes wrote:
>
> > It looks like it is going to need some
On Mon, Dec 24, 2001 at 03:19:39PM -0300, Daniel Grunblatt wrote:
> I think we should leave all that for an optimizer.
I agree with that
Sorry, my point wasn't clear:
I believe the current JIT description syntax precludes making a good optimiser.
By making all ops pass by reference, with no inf
Nicholas --
> Parrot_set_i_i(in,out): \x8b \x0d &IR2 \x89 \x0d &IR1
I'm tempted to push the specification of this information all the way
back to the syntax of .ops files, since the code that lives there
should behave the same wrt read/write on args.
Dan likes C-like syntax as much as possible
Gregor N. Purdy:
# > Parrot_set_i_i(in,out): \x8b \x0d &IR2 \x89 \x0d &IR1
#
# I'm tempted to push the specification of this information all the way
# back to the syntax of .ops files, since the code that lives there
# should behave the same wrt read/write on args.
#
# Dan likes C-like syntax as m
We have an empty 'less' pragma in Perl 5, right?
use less '6';
use less '6' => 'path/to/perl/6/version';
--Brent Dax
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Configure pumpking for Perl 6
"Nothing important happened today."
--George III of England's diary entry for 4-Jul-1776
All --
I've just committed the latest patch from Daniel Grunblat:
* Ops added set_s_s, set_s_sc, bsr_i and eq_s_sc but using calls to C
functions.
* Added JUMP(END) to place the number of bytes to the end of the current
op.
* The *.jit files syntax changed.
* Added jit/i386/li
12 matches
Mail list logo
