At 02:27 AM 8/13/2002 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>At 11:13 PM -0400 8/12/02, Clinton A. Pierce wrote:
>>At 10:04 PM 8/12/2002 +0200, Jerome Quelin wrote:
>>
>>>I looked at parrot_assembly.pod and saw:
>>>open px, sy
>>>Open the file Y on filehandle X
>>>read px, py, pz
On Mon, 5 Aug 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 1:30 PM +1000 8/6/02, Damian Conway wrote:
> >Luke Palmer asked:
> >
> >>Does:
> >>
> >> print %foo{bar}{baz};
> >>
> >>still create %foo{bar} as a hashref if it doesn't exist?
> >
> >It is my very strong hope that it will not.
>
> Unless Larry de
In message
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hash should support integer lookup. PerlHash doesn't have to, and may
> throw an exception.
I don't follow the logic behind this... Making it work for one but
not another is tricky - either get
In message
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Arrays don't have to support lookup by string keys. They also can
> throw an exception.
How about numeric keys? Presumably they can also throw an exception
as it doesn't make much sense to acce
At 5:50 PM +0100 8/13/02, Tom Hughes wrote:
>In message
> Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Arrays don't have to support lookup by string keys. They also can
>> throw an exception.
>
>How about numeric keys? Presumably they can also th
At 5:49 PM +0100 8/13/02, Tom Hughes wrote:
>In message
> Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Hash should support integer lookup. PerlHash doesn't have to, and may
>> throw an exception.
>
>I don't follow the logic behind this... Making
Hi, it's me again with my questions on pasm...
I just downloaded the latest version of Parrot (it's currently 17:00 GMT).
$ ./parrot -v
[...]
This is parrot version 0.0.7-devel built for i386-linux
[...]
$ cat test.pasm
new P0, .PerlArray
set P0[10], "foo"
set I0, P0.length
print I0
print "\n"
$
One should begin with slight updates.. :)
So this patch is just about pod in core.ops (unbalanced =over / =back, and a
missing blank line).
Btw, how do you prefer me to send patch (as if I were able to send more
patches... anyway...): plain text inside the mail or attached (such as this
one)?
In message
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Nobody's doing a get_integer on key PMCs--we're peeking directly.
> (Integer lookup can also be done via the keyed_int method of the
> vtable)
At the moment it is using get_integer as I decided
At 02:27 AM 8/13/2002 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>Anyone up to throwing a list of outstanding
> problems with the I/O system together?
From: Clinton A. Pierce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>I'd volunteer, except that I'm used to grunging
> around at the assembler level of I/O (INT 21h!)
> or with C'
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Tom Hughes wrote:
> In message
> Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Nobody's doing a get_integer on key PMCs--we're peeking directly.
> > (Integer lookup can also be done via the keyed_int method of the
> > vtable)
Jerome Quelin wrote:
>Hi, it's me again with my questions on pasm...
>
>I just downloaded the latest version of Parrot (it's currently 17:00 GMT).
>$ ./parrot -v
>[...]
>This is parrot version 0.0.7-devel built for i386-linux
>[...]
>$ cat test.pasm
>new P0, .PerlArray
>set P0[10], "foo"
>set I
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Deven T. Corzine wrote:
: However, will the "func($x{1}{2}{3})" case cause an implementation problem?
This is why the new function type signatures will assume that
parameters are constant. If you want a modifiable parameter, you
have to say "is rw". Then it's considered an
From: Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Of course, there are issues here if the code modifies those
> variables, since the issue of whether a variable is rw is
> really distinct from whether it represents a pass by value
> or reference. Slapping a "constant" on it is a bald-faced
> attempt to get th
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: From: Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: > Of course, there are issues here if the code modifies those
: > variables, since the issue of whether a variable is rw is
: > really distinct from whether it represents a pass by value
: > or reference. Slappin
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Larry Wall wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Deven T. Corzine wrote:
> : However, will the "func($x{1}{2}{3})" case cause an implementation problem?
>
> This is why the new function type signatures will assume that
> parameters are constant. If you want a modifiable parameter,
> In essence, all Perl 5 functions have a signature of (*@_ is rw).
> Perhaps the translator can turn some of those into (*@_). What'd
> really be cool is if it could pick up an initial
>
> my ($a, $b, $c) = @_;
Excuse my ignorance here, but I thought the plan for backwards
compatibility wit
On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 03:06:40PM -0400, Deven T. Corzine wrote:
> The only accurate way to know if the code modifies the variables is to do
> some sort of dataflow analysis, and it can't be 100% accurate even then.
> (Suppose a "shift" may or may not happen, depending on the parameters, then
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 03:06:40PM -0400, Deven T. Corzine wrote:
>
> > The only accurate way to know if the code modifies the variables is to do
> > some sort of dataflow analysis, and it can't be 100% accurate even then.
> > (Suppose a "shift" ma
> "NC" == Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
NC> Well, perl5 does already manage to avoid auto-vivifying hash keys
NC> when they are used as subroutine arguments. It uses magic, rather
NC> than dataflow analysis:
NC> sub rval {
NC> my $a = $_[0];
NC> }
NC> sub lval {
On 13 Aug 2002, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Melvin Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > At 06:56 PM 8/12/2002 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
> > >Here's a more interesting question: which parts of Parrot are
> > >enshrined, and which are prototypes, ready to be thrown away? For
> > >instance, I'd say mu
Well, I don't know if this is interesting, but here's a patch that implement:
op rand(out NUM)
op rand(out NUM, in INT)
and does what you can guess. There's also a test file (I don't know wether
the tests should go in an existant test file).
But, there is a tiny, little problem: I don't c
Jerome Quelin wrote:
>
> Btw, how do you prefer me to send patch (as if I were able to send more
> patches... anyway...): plain text inside the mail or attached (such as this
> one)?
This is a great start, Jerome! A name for the patch might be a nice
touch, but it applied just fine.
--
Jeff <[EM
Jerome Quelin wrote:
>
--snip--
> But, there is a tiny, little problem: I don't call srand(), and thus get
> always the same value. I don't know *where* to call srand(). I don't even
> know *if* I should call srand().
> Anyway, here's the patch and be kind since this is my first patch ;) (pod
> c
In tracing down the next crash bug using GC_DEBUG, I found that the
following code in new_stack is unsafe:
stack->buffer = new_buffer_header(interpreter);
Parrot_allocate(interpreter, stack->buffer,
sizeof(Stack_Entry_t) * STACK_CHUNK_DEPTH);
A GC can be triggered by
Piers Cawley wrote:
> I'd also like to be able to generate parrot code from within parrot
> and immediately execute it...
Something like that will be needed for eval() anyway, right?
--
John Douglas Porter
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, John Porter wrote:
> Piers Cawley wrote:
> > I'd also like to be able to generate parrot code from within parrot
> > and immediately execute it...
>
> Something like that will be needed for eval() anyway, right?
Yes, like PDB_eval() may be...
Daniel Grunblatt.
On Fri, 2 Aug 2002, Aldo Calpini wrote:
>
> hello everybody,
>
> here is my rough draft of the documentation for the
> Parrot debugger. please review it (expecially the
> boilerplate stuff like TITLE, HISTORY, etc. -- I don't
> know if I have properly followed convention) (and if there
> is one)
This is a patch that clears up all of the GC_DEBUG-revealed bugs, at
least on my machine. As I enumerated in my previous email, there are a
lot of different ways to fix these sorts of problems, and this just
kinda picks one for each problem encountered. This patch includes the
stuff done by Jason
On 12 Aug 2002, Jason Greene wrote:
> One more safety check (fixes another crash bug). Hopefully this is the
> last patch patch.
Applied, thanks.
Daniel Grunblatt.
> I have also come to the conclusion that tracking down these memory
> bugs is way too difficult right now. I tracked the above problem back
> from a seg fault, which was resulting from a garbage value in the byte
> code stream, which was triggered by adding a PMC to the free list
> until I added
Uri Guttman wrote:
[ CCs stripped ]
> ... what if you passed \$a{llama}{alpaca}? even as a read only param,
> you could deref later through the ref in another sub that gets passed it
> from this sub.
If I understand Dan's proposal ()
for a change in the KEYed methods correctly, this would wo
> Somebody gimme a cookie.
/me hands Steve a cookie.
> If the rx info object is going away, then obviously those parts of the
> patch need not be applied. But in the meantime, it's nice to have a
> Parrot that doesn't crash.
I agree. My disclaimer about the regex code in my original email was t
33 matches
Mail list logo