At 6:47 PM +0200 5/15/02, Joe Yates wrote:
>Dear all,
>
>I'm trying to print the following string:
>
> \0
>
>I.e. the output of the perl instruction
>
> print "\\0";
>
>See attached test.
>
>It's getting treated as a string terminator.
>
>Am I escaping incorrectly, or is it incorrect t
At 8:41 PM +0300 5/15/02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Does Parrot compile on ICC , if yes is it faster ?
I don't know that anyone's tried. Care to download it and take a
shot? (I don't have the free disk space on my Linux box at the moment)
--
Dan
---
At 2:49 PM -0700 5/15/02, Tony Payne wrote:
>Towers of Hanoi in parrot assembler. Feel free to use it as an example,
>or just as a test-case for PerlArrays.
Added to the repository. Thanks!
--
Dan
--"it's like this"--
At 1:38 PM + 5/16/02, Joe Yates (via RT) wrote:
># New Ticket Created by Joe Yates
># Please include the string: [netlabs #590]
># in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
># http://bugs6.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=590 >
>
>
>Dear all,
>
>In parrot code, I'
At 1:14 PM -0700 5/15/02, Brent Dax wrote:
>Dan Sugalski:
># At 12:51 AM -0700 5/15/02, Brent Dax wrote:
># >-Parrot becomes Parrot_Interp
># >-Parrot_String is gone and the string_funcs.h functions are
># no longer
># >externally visible. -A few structures have been renamed.
># >-config.h has bee
At 4:19 PM -0400 5/15/02, Kevin Falcone wrote:
> > "BD" == Brent Dax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>BD> Chris Ball:
>BD> # (Note: My first attempt at this message bounced from
>BD> # onion.perl.org, which is why it's going to p6i. Reported to
>BD> # [EMAIL PROTECTED], who's looking into it.)
At 9:53 PM +0200 5/15/02, Peter Gibbs wrote:
>The attached patch is the next set of proposed changes to the memory
>management routines, with the copy-on-write logic removed.
Peter, did these go in?
--
Dan
--"it's like
At 2:27 PM -0400 5/16/02, Melvin Smith wrote:
>If we are not to put non-embed visible in config.h, we must
>pre-process parrot.h, because I need to put symbls such as
>EXP_NETWORKING somewhere.
Put anything that alters how Parrot works in config.h. It won't
ultimately be included by embedders.
-
At 12:45 PM -0500 5/16/02, David M. Lloyd wrote:
>Is CVS access for Parrot still invitation-only? If not, I would like to
>request CVS access. I have posted mildly useful patches (mostly warning
>fixes really) in the past; I don't think any have ever been rejected.
>
>The CVS page at dev.perl.or
Hi,
I was reading Damian's new excellent diary entry in which he explains the
new currying syntax for Perl6.
(For the lazy ones it's reachable at
http://www.yetanother.org/damian/diary_latest.html)
This new feature allows to partially fill place-holder functions, such as:
my &div = {$^x / $^
On Sat, May 18, 2002 at 12:18:14PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 9:53 PM +0200 5/15/02, Peter Gibbs wrote:
> >The attached patch is the next set of proposed changes to the memory
> >management routines, with the copy-on-write logic removed.
>
> Peter, did these go in?
I don't think so, and I d
At 10:29 AM -0700 5/18/02, Steve Fink wrote:
>On Sat, May 18, 2002 at 12:18:14PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>> At 9:53 PM +0200 5/15/02, Peter Gibbs wrote:
>> >The attached patch is the next set of proposed changes to the memory
>> >management routines, with the copy-on-write logic removed.
>>
On Sat, 18 May 2002, Angel Faus wrote:
> ...curry example...
> But I am not sure I like the syntax. The problems I see are:
>
> - You only can curry placeholder-generated functions. So if you intend to
> make a function curryiable, you are forced to use place-holders, even if
> that's not the cle
Angel Faus writes:
: Hi,
:
: I was reading Damian's new excellent diary entry in which he explains the
: new currying syntax for Perl6.
:
: (For the lazy ones it's reachable at
: http://www.yetanother.org/damian/diary_latest.html)
:
: This new feature allows to partially fill place-holder funct
3uke Palmer writes:
: Perhaps if it's generated with placeholders, the C<.curry> would be
: implicit. That way we can stay terse when the situation is simple. Like
: with Damian's C...C example. When I'm writing scripts, I
: don't want to type those 6 characters, but if I'm doing structured
The COW patch has been revised for minimal impact to the outside world.
The only files changed are: resources.h, resources.c, string.h, string.c
There is one API change: Parrot_reallocate_string has an additional
parameter. However, nobody outside string.c really has any business calling
that anyw
Dan Sugalski:
# At 1:14 PM -0700 5/15/02, Brent Dax wrote:
# >Dan Sugalski:
# ># At 12:51 AM -0700 5/15/02, Brent Dax wrote:
# ># >-Parrot becomes Parrot_Interp
# ># >-Parrot_String is gone and the string_funcs.h functions are # no
# >longer # >externally visible. -A few structures have been rena
At 3:16 PM -0700 5/18/02, Brent Dax wrote:
>Dan Sugalski:
># At 1:14 PM -0700 5/15/02, Brent Dax wrote:
># >Dan Sugalski:
># ># At 12:51 AM -0700 5/15/02, Brent Dax wrote:
># ># >-Parrot becomes Parrot_Interp
># ># >-Parrot_String is gone and the string_funcs.h functions are # no
># >longer # >ext
At 11:05 PM +0200 5/18/02, Peter Gibbs wrote:
>The COW patch has been revised for minimal impact to the outside world.
>The only files changed are: resources.h, resources.c, string.h, string.c
>There is one API change: Parrot_reallocate_string has an additional
>parameter. However, nobody outside
I decided to do some profiling and tinkering and I picked the PerlInt class
since its one of the most common. There is a large gap between our
MOPS benchmarks when using the plain INT registers as opposed to
the PMC regs.
There seems to be much room for optimization in the PMC virtual
methods, ev
At 07:25 PM 5/18/2002 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>># Flag handling, or at least feature enabling, should probably be done
>># by core code. We should provide a set_feature() function
>>
>>Right now we have something like this:
>>
>> Parrot_setflag(interpreter, PARROT_CGOTO_FLAG, NULL);
>>
At 7:25 PM -0400 5/18/02, Melvin Smith wrote:
>Yeh I know that word is yucky and from Java land, but in this case,
>I think that
>"system" PMCs should take liberties for optimization.
*All* PMCs should take liberties for optimization. PMC vtable entries
are the only things that should know the
At 7:31 PM -0400 5/18/02, Melvin Smith wrote:
>At 07:25 PM 5/18/2002 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>>># Flag handling, or at least feature enabling, should probably be done
>>># by core code. We should provide a set_feature() function
>>>
>>>Right now we have something like this:
>>>
>>> Parr
At 07:33 PM 5/18/2002 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>At 7:25 PM -0400 5/18/02, Melvin Smith wrote:
>>Yeh I know that word is yucky and from Java land, but in this case, I
>>think that
>>"system" PMCs should take liberties for optimization.
>
>*All* PMCs should take liberties for optimization. PMC vt
At 7:35 PM -0400 5/18/02, Melvin Smith wrote:
>At 07:33 PM 5/18/2002 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>>At 7:25 PM -0400 5/18/02, Melvin Smith wrote:
>>>Yeh I know that word is yucky and from Java land, but in this
>>>case, I think that
>>>"system" PMCs should take liberties for optimization.
>>
>>*All
>>>Also, it's perfectly fine for a coordinated group of PMCs (like, say,
>>>the ones that provide perl's base scalar behavior) to share grubby
>>>internal knowledge, though I'd like to keep that under control, as it's
>>>easy to get out of sync.
Ok, now that I'm looking closer, it appears my
Dan Sugalski:
# At 3:16 PM -0700 5/18/02, Brent Dax wrote:
# >Dan Sugalski:
# ># At 1:14 PM -0700 5/15/02, Brent Dax wrote:
# ># >Dan Sugalski:
# ># ># At 12:51 AM -0700 5/15/02, Brent Dax wrote:
# ># ># >-Parrot becomes Parrot_Interp
# ># ># >-Parrot_String is gone and the string_funcs.h
# funct
Melvin Smith:
# At 07:25 PM 5/18/2002 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
# >># Flag handling, or at least feature enabling, should
# probably be done
# >># by core code. We should provide a set_feature() function
# >>
# >>Right now we have something like this:
# >>
# >> Parrot_setflag(interprete
On Fri, May 17, 2002 at 05:40:30PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
> Back to from where this arose, however, I think LAST (and BETWEEN, if
> it will exist) should probably be PRE blocks. This is the only way it
> could be consistently possible to implement. It wouldn't make any
> sense to have it a PRE
So here I am, hacking BASIC to use keyed PMC's for variables to make it
blazingly fast when I find out that to do this I need to use the new
assembler. So I pop into lib\parrot and proceed with the build and I get
this mess:
C:\projects\parrot\parrot\lib\Parrot>perl makefile.pl
Writing Makefi
Aaron Sherman writes:
: On Wed, 2002-05-15 at 21:38, root wrote:
: >
: > I've always liked how VB allowed you to define "instance methods."
: > Basically a more elegant way of doing callbacks, plus allows some
: > structure within your callbacks. Will Perl6 allow this (Perl5 sortof did,
: > bu
Clinton A Pierce wrote:
>
> So here I am, hacking BASIC to use keyed PMC's for variables to make it
> blazingly fast when I find out that to do this I need to use the new
> assembler. So I pop into lib\parrot and proceed with the build and I get
> this mess:
>
--snip--
>
> So the new assembler
Jeff wrote:
>
> Clinton A Pierce wrote:
> >
> > So here I am, hacking BASIC to use keyed PMC's for variables to make it
> > blazingly fast when I find out that to do this I need to use the new
> > assembler. So I pop into lib\parrot and proceed with the build and I get
> > this mess:
> >
> --sni
At 09:27 PM 5/18/2002 -0400, Jeff wrote:
> > So the new assembler's unhappy. Suggestions?
>
>Well, it's unhappy when you do lots of things. The code I was given was
>not as complete/functional as I had been led to believe, inasmuch as it
>doesn't live past test series 2 without some major tweaks
Clinton A Pierce wrote:
>
> At 09:27 PM 5/18/2002 -0400, Jeff wrote:
> > > So the new assembler's unhappy. Suggestions?
> >
> >Well, it's unhappy when you do lots of things. The code I was given was
> >not as complete/functional as I had been led to believe, inasmuch as it
> >doesn't live past t
# New Ticket Created by Jeffrey Goff
# Please include the string: [netlabs #596]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://bugs6.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=596 >
I've just patched lib/Parrot/Makefile.PL to check for a Win32 platform,
and if so, us
So we're going to support some vtable operations for GC support.
We currently have mark, and we're going to have collect.
Is there a plan to make a freed method for when pmc header gets put back
onto the free list? (This would require we call this method on all pmc's
before moving anything to the
I think the inc/dec op (NUM, NUM) should be (NUM, INT)
While I'm adding the PMC support for inc/dec I'll
fix that, unless I'm wrong. INC/DEC by a NUM is not
in the PDD.
-Melvin
Filled in some missing holes:
-Implement PMC inc/dec functions and add ops to engine.
'inc P0, 5' is faster than 'set P0, P1, 5' which uses a vtable.
-Corrected 'inc Nx, Ny' to 'inc Nx, Iy' as per the PDD
-Added missing 'add Nx, Ny, Iz' op
Updated mops_p.pasm to use dec op, however, the intent wa
Below adds docs at the top of each function about whether that function
calls pool compaction or dod. The dod functions and compaction functions
don't list the other one themselves, otherwise they'd be re-entrant. ;)
Also fixes a bug I found with GC_DEBUG. Namely, that during compaction,
when it
40 matches
Mail list logo
