# New Ticket Created by "Markus Laire"
# Please include the string: [perl #16745]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=16745 >
Compiling imcc dies on Cygwin with error "No rule to make target
'anyop.h', needed
On 25 Aug 2002 at 1:22, Simon Cozens wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski) writes:
> > We're shooting for a release mid-next-week
>
> I don't wish to criticise the release process in any way, but when
> someone announces a mid-week release, I don't know about you, but
> I'd consider it compl
In message <20020825071653$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Jerome Quelin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, I corrected it because there is both infinitive and third person,
> depending on the method described:
> Example:
>[...]
>BIGNUM* shift_bignum(INTERP, PMC* self)
> Returns ...
>
In message <20020825070751$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mike Lambert (via RT) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The below patch fixes the languages/parrot_compiler/ code to work again
> with the new keyed syntax. It correctly compiles
> languages/parrot_compiler/sample.pasm and parrot executes it fine
On Sun, Aug 25, 2002 at 12:13:36AM -0400, Tanton Gibbs wrote:
> > In my understanding, no. One possible implementation is to set a flag when
> > we create an active_destruction PMC (like IO::File), and perform dod runs
> > at every block close until we don't have any such PMCs left.
>
> I earlier
> In this case, it is quite likely that many programs will get that flag
> set. In which case, we'll need to be doing a DOD run at the end of most
> blocks
I would hope not. The only things which will set this flag are those items
needing deterministic destruction, not all
items with a destruct
On Sun, Aug 25, 2002 at 11:16:35AM -0400, Tanton Gibbs wrote:
> > In this case, it is quite likely that many programs will get that flag
> > set. In which case, we'll need to be doing a DOD run at the end of most
> > blocks
>
> I would hope not. The only things which will set this flag are those
On Sat, Aug 24, 2002 at 11:46:27PM -0400, Mike Lambert wrote:
> Perhaps I do need a slower machine. I'm not normally one for
> purchasing/developing on slower computers, howeverit's much slower
> when I do that. :)
Very true in the general case, but the testing stage (and also any
benchmarkin
Added the necessary files, so it should be working again. There are still
a couple outstanding syntax issues, but you should only run into those on
some of the regex tests.
/s
On Sun, 25 Aug 2002, Markus Laire wrote:
> # New Ticket Created by "Markus Laire"
> # Please include the string: [pe
# New Ticket Created by Tom Hughes
# Please include the string: [perl #16755]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=16755 >
Recent changes to imcc make it require a working Parrot_dlopen but
unfortunately as thing
On Sun, Aug 25, 2002 at 04:22:33PM +0100, Dave Mitchell wrote:
> Well, if understood you correctly, then a single execution of
>
> my $fh = IO::File->new(...)
>
> anywhere in the program or its libraries would trigger this slow behaviour
> for the rest of the program. I'd have thought that t
I ran across this in looking at tidying up old bugs. It seems like things
are backwards below -- hyper-operation is a language-level shorthand for
iteration over a container, so there's no reason for the container's
vtable methods to be "hyper". Actually, it seems like there are at least
a coupl
In message <20020825155505$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Tom Hughes (via RT) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Recent changes to imcc make it require a working Parrot_dlopen but
> unfortunately as things stand it never does work because Configure.pl
> never sets HAS_DLOPEN so Parrot_dlopen is also stub
At 7:56 PM +0100 8/24/02, Simon Cozens wrote:
>The reason I decided to use a tree rather than bytecode was nothing to do
>with efficiency, backtracking or anything else. It was about flexibility.
>More specifically, the flexibility to modify or rewrite portions of the
>grammar, and particularly to
At 4:22 PM +0100 8/25/02, Dave Mitchell wrote:
>On Sun, Aug 25, 2002 at 11:16:35AM -0400, Tanton Gibbs wrote:
>> > In this case, it is quite likely that many programs will get that flag
>> > set. In which case, we'll need to be doing a DOD run at the end of most
>> > blocks
>>
>> I would hope
On 25 Aug 2002 at 18:45, Tom Hughes wrote:
> In message <20020825155505$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Tom Hughes (via RT) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Recent changes to imcc make it require a working Parrot_dlopen but
> > unfortunately as things stand it never does work because Configure.pl
In message <20020825181959$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Markus Laire" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I applied this patch locally, but making imcc still ends with error
> "cannot find -ldl"
> (I quess that means Parrot_dlopen library as Cygwin has no such file)
That sounds like a separate bug in
On Sun, 25 Aug 2002, Tom Hughes wrote:
> That sounds like a separate bug in the imcc makefile - the main
> parrot makefile only links against libdl if Configure.pl discovers
> that perl5 does.
Yes. I will update imcc to do so as well.
/s
On Sun, Aug 25, 2002 at 01:34:32PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 4:22 PM +0100 8/25/02, Dave Mitchell wrote:
> >Well, if understood you correctly, then a single execution of
> >
> >my $fh = IO::File->new(...)
> >
> >anywhere in the program or its libraries would trigger this slow behaviour
On Sun, 25 Aug 2002, Tom Hughes wrote:
> In message <20020825155505$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Tom Hughes (via RT) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Recent changes to imcc make it require a working Parrot_dlopen but
> > unfortunately as things stand it never does work because Configure.pl
> >
> > my $fh = IO::File->new(...)
> >
> >anywhere in the program or its libraries would trigger this slow
behaviour
> >for the rest of the program.
>
> No. That's why we make it a counter. When a DOD run is made we recalc
> the number of deterministci destructions needed.
But, more than likely,
We are supposedly going to be able to set a class to be
"uninheritable". Will we be able to set a single method or attribute to
be uniherited by any subclasses? Please forgive me if this is one of
the seven deadly OO sins. I haven't yet had any formal education with
regards to programming(a
On 25 Aug 2002 at 13:26, Sean O'Rourke wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Aug 2002, Tom Hughes wrote:
>
> > In message <20020825155505$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > Here's a patch that addresses both those issues and makes imcc
> > work again.
>
> Here's a patch that hopefully addresses the makefile issue. imcc
# New Ticket Created by Nicholas Clark
# Please include the string: [perl #16763]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=16763 >
If I build parrot on sparc Linux I see 4 compiler warnings total:
resources.c: In fu
# New Ticket Created by Jason Gloudon
# Please include the string: [perl #16764]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=16764 >
This is a simple fix to the broken libparrot.a makefile target for Visual C++
win32 b
Damian wrote:
> Debbie Pickett asked:
> > So my question is: why two words for regular expressions, but only one
> > for subroutines? Are "rule" and "rx" just alternate spellings, much as
> > Perl5's "for" and "foreach" are? If so, why the two keywords?
> > If not, why not?
> They are not quite
On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, Markus Laire wrote:
> I tested than on Cygwin and imcc does compile, but I have some
> problems:
>
> If I compile imcc with 'make imcc', most perl6 tests will fail with
> error "readline() on closed filehandle P6C::TestCompiler::PASM at
> P6C/TestCompiler.pm line 55."
"make i
Minor language and POD reworkings. Does anyone have the original
description of PMCs? The entry is truncated.
Index: glossary.pod
===
RCS file: /cvs/public/parrot/docs/glossary.pod,v
retrieving revision 1.5
diff -u -r1.5 glossary.po
At 10:45 PM 8/25/2002 -0400, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
>Minor language and POD reworkings. Does anyone have the original
>description of PMCs? The entry is truncated.
Applied.
> "DAP" == Deborah Ariel Pickett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
DAP> C allows us to define both named and anonymous rules, depending on
DAP> context. C allows us to define only anonymous rules. C is
DAP> the more general one, and you can use it exclusively if that's what you
DAP> feel
I just added condition breakpoints and watchpoints, now you can do:
(pdb) b 4 if S14 <= "parrot"
See docs/debugger.pod for details.
Is it worst to allow something like this?:
if (((S14 == I0) && (I4 <= N3) && (N3 < 4.5 < N7)) || (I5 == 32))
Daniel Grunblatt.
Note! Some of the following is hypothetical, not strictly based on Apocalypses
and such. Now that your brain is in the right mode:
Uri wrote:
> > "DAP" == Deborah Ariel Pickett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> DAP> C allows us to define both named and anonymous rules, depending on
> DAP> co
Deborah Ariel Pickett wrote:
> I'm imagining a table something like this:
>
> Subroutine Pattern matching
>
>
> Default { code } / pattern /
> delimiter
>
> Declare
> Funny you should mention that. This brings up something that I was
> afraid to mention before, lest it be regarded as too weird. There isn't
> any strong syntactic reason for subs to be delimited with just braces either.[*]
> Sure, there's a historical Perl precedent, and I'd probably be force
On Sun, 25 Aug 2002, Glenn Linderman wrote:
> Deborah Ariel Pickett wrote:
>
> > I'm imagining a table something like this:
> >
> > Subroutine Pattern matching
> >
> >
> > Default { c
Markus Laire wrote:
> I tested than on Cygwin and imcc does compile, but I have some
> problems:
>
> If I compile imcc with 'make imcc', most perl6 tests will fail with
> error "readline() on closed filehandle P6C::TestCompiler::PASM at
> P6C/TestCompiler.pm line 55."
This looks like imcc d
On 25 Aug 2002 at 19:28, Sean O'Rourke wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, Markus Laire wrote:
> > I tested than on Cygwin and imcc does compile, but I have some
> > problems:
> >
> > If I compile imcc with 'make imcc', most perl6 tests will fail with
> > error "readline() on closed filehandle P6C::Tes
On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, Markus Laire wrote:
> > Does the same thing happen when you do a "make shared"
> > in the base parrot directory?
>
> "make shared" dies with 'missing .h files'
More competent and/or Windows-savvy hands than mine are working on this as
we speak.
> "make && make shared" gives
On 23 Aug 2002 at 22:29, Damian Conway wrote:
> > 2) p3, "This or nothing", Have I got :, ::, and ::: straight?
> >
> > o : backtrack fails rule
> No. Backtrack skips the preceding atom.
>
> > o :: backtrack fails surrounding group
> Yes.
>
> > o ::: backtrack fails whole match
> No. Bac
# New Ticket Created by Steve Fink
# Please include the string: [perl #16767]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=16767 >
- eliminates a bunch of seg faults from bad input
- allow passing command-line arguments
40 matches
Mail list logo
