Re: Perl6 Macros

2002-03-28 Thread Luke Palmer
How about we implement some way to peer into coderefs? Maybe just on the top level, with attributes, or maybe a syntax tree (probably not). Because here, what both arguments (in the discussion) are missing, is the ability to look at their arguments' (the uh, ones you pass in) internal struct

GC bugs

2002-03-28 Thread Peter Gibbs
I have traced the problems with Josh's deep stack pushp/popp test to two problems with the garbage collector: 1) Strings pointed to by pmc->cache.struct_val are not marked as live 2) If a dod run is initiated while a pmc is being created, it will be freed as nobody points to it yet Since both th

Re: Perl6 Macros

2002-03-28 Thread Simon Cozens
Aaron Sherman: > This just brought something to mind when I re-read it. I was thinking > about how this would transform back into Perl, and I thought... gee, you > can't do that easily because you're taking the result of a block, and > Perl can only do that via function call or eval, Or do, whic

Re: "deep" tests for stacks.t

2002-03-28 Thread Michel J Lambert
Oh, yay. Orange tinderboxen rule, only because I haven't seen that much orange in quite awhile. :) Anyways, I looked into the bug. There's actually a few problems...First, is that perlstrings use the structval to store the buffer, and so it gets missed by the GC. The patch below fixes perlstring

Re: GC bugs

2002-03-28 Thread Michel J Lambert
Hm...so I'm guessing my patch is the 'quick hacks' you tried and found worked? I agree my solution is a bit hackish. But I'm not sure how else to keep them. The only other solution I can think of is to make a 'GC linked list', which we put items on to immediately after construction, and take them

Re: "deep" tests for stacks.t

2002-03-28 Thread Clinton A. Pierce
>Regardless, this patch does make 'make test' happy again, and should be >safe to apply apply, as long as we don't forget about the afore-mentioned >caveat, which will probably come back to bite us in the future if we don't >take care of it. I wonder how many more GC bugs are lurking, waiting for

A thought occured to me...

2002-03-28 Thread Piers Cawley
Wouldn't it be nice if you could do: class Foo { ... &{intern('{}')} := method ($self: $key) is lvalue { ... } } So, later, you could do: $obj = Foo.new; $obj{something} = $something_else; ie, overriding hash lookups, array lookups, whatever. (I'm using a Lispish 'intern

Re: A thought occured to me...

2002-03-28 Thread Simon Cozens
Piers Cawley: > ie, overriding hash lookups, array lookups, whatever. Ah, you want C#/Python indexers, you do. So do I. -- "If that makes any sense to you, you have a big problem." -- C. Durance, Computer Science 234

Strings/Stack access hanging (small version)

2002-03-28 Thread Clinton A. Pierce
>Try out bug #465 for size, as it's my current holdup (for some reason it >didn't forward to p6i). In this case a restore instruction sends the >parrot runtime into a loop from which it never (28 hours later) >recovers. It's probably Yet Another Garbage Collection bug or related to >the stu

Re: Strings/Stack access hanging (small version)

2002-03-28 Thread Peter Gibbs
Clinton The following patch seems to fix both these problems. It makes some slight changes to the logic, so should be considered a temporary fix until Dan has time to take a look at the code. -- Peter Gibbs EmKel Systems Index: resources.c ===

Re: A thought occured to me...

2002-03-28 Thread Piers Cawley
Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Piers Cawley: >> ie, overriding hash lookups, array lookups, whatever. > > Ah, you want C#/Python indexers, you do. So do I. Um... is that what you call 'em. Actually, you can already do 'use overload q|%{}|', to sort of do this... -- Piers "It i

Re: A thought occured to me...

2002-03-28 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 12:59 PM + 3/28/02, Piers Cawley wrote: >Wouldn't it be nice if you could do: > >class Foo { > ... > > &{intern('{}')} := method ($self: $key) is lvalue { > ... > } >} > >So, later, you could do: > >$obj = Foo.new; > >$obj{something} = $something_else; > >ie, overriding

Re: Perl6 Macros

2002-03-28 Thread Aaron Sherman
On Wed, 2002-03-27 at 19:46, Michel J Lambert wrote: > > Macros could add something to Perl, but I don't see why having a macro > > return a string instead of looking and acting like a subroutine would be > > a bad thing. In fact, as I pointed out before, you can do almost all of > > the scoping

Re: "deep" tests for stacks.t

2002-03-28 Thread Melvin Smith
At 07:10 AM 3/28/2002 -0500, Clinton A. Pierce wrote: >Try out bug #465 for size, as it's my current holdup (for some reason it didn't >forward to p6i). In this case a restore instruction sends the parrot runtime into a >loop from which it never (28 hours later) recovers. It's probably Yet A

Re: Perl6 Macros

2002-03-28 Thread Aaron Sherman
On Thu, 2002-03-28 at 10:19, Aaron Sherman wrote: > Here's what I suggest as a compromise: > > macro forall ($iterator, $list, $block) { > my @ltmp = ($list); > foreach $iterator -> @ltmp $block > } > forall{$var}{@list}{{print;}}; > > Where the parser sees "macro NAME P

[Patch] Fatal errors for invalid chartype/encoding lookups

2002-03-28 Thread Josh Wilmes
I forgot to send this patch last night. I was browsing through the code and noticed these "return NULL"s for what I think are probably really fatal conditions. Here's a patch which switches them to internal_exceptions. Hopefully i'm not missing the point here. --Josh Index: chartype.c ==

RT is your friend...

2002-03-28 Thread Dan Sugalski
When you come across bugs, or there are things that should be implemented but aren't, could folks make entries in the perl 6 bugtracking system so we don't lose track? http://bugs6.perl.org. Thanks. (And don't feel like any code I've written is sacrosanct--it's not, and I'm happy to have it y

Re: RT is your friend...

2002-03-28 Thread Josh Wilmes
Should we be using bugs6 for all patches? --Josh At 15:04 on 03/28/2002 EST, Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > When you come across bugs, or there are things that should be > implemented but aren't, could folks make entries in the perl 6 > bugtracking system so we don't lose track? ht

Re: RT is your friend...

2002-03-28 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 3:38 PM -0500 3/28/02, Josh Wilmes wrote: >Should we be using bugs6 for all patches? Certainly not required--I want the patches more than I want people to jump through any extra hoops. I won't object if people do, though. :) >At 15:04 on 03/28/2002 EST, Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote

Current release targets

2002-03-28 Thread Jeff
Are, as mentioned, Unicode and keyed aggregates. Dan's volunteered to work on keyed aggregates, which leaves me to work on Unicode. I hope to have something put together over the weekend. -- Jeff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: Current release targets

2002-03-28 Thread Steve Fink
On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 06:50:06PM -0500, Jeff wrote: > Are, as mentioned, Unicode and keyed aggregates. Dan's volunteered to > work on keyed aggregates, which leaves me to work on Unicode. I hope to > have something put together over the weekend. I have some stuff done on keyed aggregates. Nothi

[Patch] Add support for tests in C

2002-03-28 Thread Josh Wilmes
This should enable writing tests which call parrot C functions directly, which could be useful for increasing coverage to things which aren't easy to call via opcodes. -- Josh Wilmes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | http://www.hitchhiker.org Index: Makefile.in ===

RE: [Patch] Add support for tests in C

2002-03-28 Thread Brent Dax
[EMAIL PROTECTED]: # This should enable writing tests which call parrot C # functions directly, # which could be useful for increasing coverage to things which # aren't easy to # call via opcodes. And it will shatter Windows. Don't even think about committing it. --Brent Dax <[EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: [Patch] Add support for tests in C

2002-03-28 Thread Josh Wilmes
Could you be specific? I was careful to do things identically to Configure.pl (because we lack any common code I can use right now- that's another problem we need to solve) --Josh At 22:03 on 03/28/2002 PST, "Brent Dax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # This should enable w

[PATCH] keep .c files

2002-03-28 Thread Steve Fink
Anyone else like to keep generated .c files around for stepping through with gdb? (Does this work with Windows make?) -- Gimme a job! http://foxglove.dnsalias.org/~sfink/job.html C, perl, networking, performance optimization, Java, XML. Index: Makefile.in ===

[PATCH] help the assembler find itself

2002-03-28 Thread Steve Fink
Is the new assembler going to land soon? If not, this has been helpful to me. -- Gimme a job! http://foxglove.dnsalias.org/~sfink/job.html C, perl, networking, performance optimization, Java, XML. Index: assemble.pl === RCS file: /

RE: [Patch] Add support for tests in C

2002-03-28 Thread Brent Dax
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] # Could you be specific? I was careful to do things identically to # Configure.pl (because we lack any common code I can use right # now- that's # another problem we need to solve) libparrot.a isn't even the right name on Windows, and the target itsel

[PATCH] ord documentation

2002-03-28 Thread Steve Fink
I didn't commit this directly in case string_ord isn't supposed to be doing what it's doing. (It always seemed kind of odd to me to have a positional ord -- why not call that index? But it's extremely useful.) And I'd have to reread Jarkko's Unicode primer to have any clue whether I'm using the te

[PATCH] get_string on undef

2002-03-28 Thread Steve Fink
Returning NULL seems rather harsh. Is this the right way? -- Gimme a job! http://foxglove.dnsalias.org/~sfink/job.html C, perl, networking, performance optimization, Java, XML. Index: classes/perlundef.pmc === RCS file: /home/perlc

Re: [Patch] Add support for tests in C

2002-03-28 Thread Josh Wilmes
OK- i assumed that target was OK, since it was in the makefile. I'll discuss this with you some more- perhaps this is the time to abstract away some of this building-things stuff. --Josh At 22:23 on 03/28/2002 PST, "Brent Dax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PR

RE: [PATCH] get_string on undef

2002-03-28 Thread Brent Dax
Steve Fink: # Returning NULL seems rather harsh. Is this the right way? # # -- # Gimme a job! http://foxglove.dnsalias.org/~sfink/job.html # C, perl, networking, performance optimization, Java, XML. # # Index: classes/perlundef.pmc #

[PATCH] discarding the unborn

2002-03-28 Thread Steve Fink
When you call pmc_new, the init() routine is run before the PMC is anchored to the root set. This is a problem for things like aggregates, because they are likely to want to allocate a big Buffer during initialization. And disabling GC entirely just feels wrong -- especially with pmc_new_sized, it

[RETRACTED] get_string on undef

2002-03-28 Thread Steve Fink
On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 10:34:48PM -0800, Brent Dax wrote: > Steve Fink: > # Returning NULL seems rather harsh. Is this the right way? > # > # Index: classes/perlundef.pmc > # === > # RCS file: /home/perlcvs/parrot/classes/perlundef.p

Re: [PATCH] discarding the unborn

2002-03-28 Thread Melvin Smith
At 10:30 PM 3/28/2002 -0800, Steve Fink wrote: >When you call pmc_new, the init() routine is run before the PMC is >anchored to the root set. This is a problem for things like >aggregates, because they are likely to want to allocate a big Buffer >during initialization. And disabling GC entirely ju

Re: [RETRACTED] get_string on undef

2002-03-28 Thread Melvin Smith
At 10:50 PM 3/28/2002 -0800, Steve Fink wrote: > > The string_* functions treat NULL and an empty string as equivalent, so > > this saves time in case we don't actually do anything with the string. > >Okay, I just checked and you're right. I ran into it because not >everything goes through the str

Re: [RETRACTED] get_string on undef

2002-03-28 Thread Josh Wilmes
Whatever the answer is, it better end up in a PDD :) --Josh At 2:00 on 03/29/2002 EST, Melvin Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 10:50 PM 3/28/2002 -0800, Steve Fink wrote: > > > The string_* functions treat NULL and an empty string as equivalent, so > > > this saves time in case we don't a

Re: [RETRACTED] get_string on undef

2002-03-28 Thread Steve Fink
On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 02:00:16AM -0500, Melvin Smith wrote: > At 10:50 PM 3/28/2002 -0800, Steve Fink wrote: > >> The string_* functions treat NULL and an empty string as equivalent, so > >> this saves time in case we don't actually do anything with the string. > > > >Okay, I just checked and yo

Re: [PATCH] discarding the unborn

2002-03-28 Thread Michel J Lambert
FWIW, I've already submitted a patch which fixes this bug. I'm also about to submit a patch which fixes it in a slightly better way, along with a few of other (mostly GC) bugs I've tracked down tonight with the help of clint's wonderfully abusive code. The original email was: http:[EMAIL PROTECTE

Re: [RETRACTED] get_string on undef

2002-03-28 Thread Melvin Smith
> > At one point I heard someone in charge say that NULLs were treated > > as invalid internal state and a routine was not obligated to check for > > NULL registers. > > > > If this is no longer the case, or never was, then I was either mistaken or > > missed the email. Especially since I was arg

Re: [PATCH] discarding the unborn

2002-03-28 Thread Steve Fink
On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 01:54:00AM -0500, Melvin Smith wrote: > At 10:30 PM 3/28/2002 -0800, Steve Fink wrote: > >When you call pmc_new, the init() routine is run before the PMC is > >anchored to the root set. This is a problem for things like > >aggregates, because they are likely to want to allo

Re: [RETRACTED] get_string on undef

2002-03-28 Thread Josh Wilmes
At 2:14 on 03/29/2002 EST, Melvin Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Boy a searchable archive would be nifty right about now. Might be > time for me to slurp the archive down to a local copy. Try this: http://www.mail-archive.com/perl6-internals@perl.org/ --Josh

Re: [RETRACTED] get_string on undef

2002-03-28 Thread Melvin Smith
At 02:25 AM 3/29/2002 -0500, Josh Wilmes wrote: >Try this: > >http://www.mail-archive.com/perl6-internals@perl.org/ Ah great! Last time I tried this it was dead. Must have been a temporary thing. -Melvin

Re: [PATCH] discarding the unborn

2002-03-28 Thread Steve Fink
On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 02:14:09AM -0500, Michel J Lambert wrote: > FWIW, I've already submitted a patch which fixes this bug. I'm also about > to submit a patch which fixes it in a slightly better way, along with a > few of other (mostly GC) bugs I've tracked down tonight with the help of > clint

Re: [RETRACTED] get_string on undef

2002-03-28 Thread Melvin Smith
>That's what confused me too. But now I think that must have been for >PMC registers only, not string registers. From the archive: So speaketh Dan. >I seem to remember someone unpatching a couple of if (NULL == string) >statements recently. I'll be blunt and say: DON'T DO THAT. Defens