Hello everybody,
that's a few month i'm following this mailing list. i dont like all the changes
that are being made to perl, i'm using perl since '97, anyway if i think about
it they're mostly all (until i understand everything) benefit to the language.
To make the background i was an assembl
At 02:12 PM 9/10/2002 +0200, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>"perl6 --test -r" runs (i.e. executes inside imcc) _all_ perl6 tests
>(including t/compiler/8_5.p6) now correctly, _if_ GC is turned off.
Does this include the patch you sent me? I was unable to apply it
so it sort of sat in my queue.
-Melvin
Leopold Toetsch sent the following bits through the ether:
> Could you try my second proposal?
Sure. The patch I tried is attached, which fixes up a lot of the
warnings. However, I now get:
cc -pipe -fno-common -no-cpp-precomp -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe -fno-common
-g-I../../include -o imcpar
So, do we have a timetable for when the Perl 6 interpreter is going
handle closures?
Also, consider the following:
sub fac($n) {
when 0 { 1 }
default { $n * fac($n - 1) }
}
print1 fac(10);
Compiling this barfs because there's 'no topic in fac', despite the
apocalypse stating tha
Leon Brocard wrote:
> Leopold Toetsch sent the following bits through the ether:
>
And finally, in imc.c there is another »int n_spilled;«, please delete
this line.
Sorry,
leo
Leon Brocard wrote:
> Leopold Toetsch sent the following bits through the ether:
>
>
>>Could you try my second proposal?
>>
>
> Sure. The patch I tried is attached, which fixes up a lot of the
> warnings. However, I now get:
>
> ld: multiple definitions of symbol _n_spilled
> imcparser.o defi
So, I know that recursion doesn't seem to work in the simple case, but
at least it reaches runtime. Mutual recursion doesn't even compile
successfully.
Here's the classic example of mutual recursion:
sub even ($n) {
given $n {
when 0 { return 1 };
default { odd($n-1) };
}
Leopold Toetsch sent the following bits through the ether:
> And finally, in imc.c there is another »int n_spilled;«, please delete
> this line.
Cool, I've done the past two patches and it compiles but then fails to
compile parrot shared:
cc -pipe -fno-common -no-cpp-precomp -fno-strict-aliasi
I've decided it's time for me to take another break from this list.
Not that any of you care, but I think the reason is important.
Due to a silly misunderstanding -- one which could have been easily
avoided by a simple request for clarification -- our Illustrious
Summarizer decided to be grievous
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Leon Brocard wrote:
> Cool, I've done the past two patches and it compiles but then fails to
> compile parrot shared:
>
> cc -shared -L/usr/local/lib -flat_namespace -o blib/lib/libparrot.so exceptions.o
>global_setup.o interpreter.o parrot.o register.o core_ops.o core_o
Andy Dougherty sent the following bits through the ether:
> Yup, That's a long-standing bug. Here, again, is the correct fix for it.
Cool, finally imcc works. Now, what's the best way to roll in all the
patches? Are they the correct fixes?
Leon
--
Leon Brocard.htt
Leon Brocard wrote:
> Leopold Toetsch sent the following bits through the ether:
> Cool, I've done the past two patches and it compiles but then fails to
> compile parrot shared:
We are getting close ;-)
> cc: unrecognized option `-shared'
And here probably helps the patch, that was sent t
# New Ticket Created by Leopold Toetsch
# Please include the string: [perl #17193]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=17193 >
Here is a patch, that is selfcontained in packfile.c, so should be
useful for other
# New Ticket Created by System Attendant
# Please include the string: [perl #17194]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=17194 >
ScanMail for Microsoft Exchange has blocked a file attachment(s).
Place = [EMAIL P
Luke Palmer wrote:
> This requires infinite lookahead to parse. Nobody likes infinite
> lookahead grammars.
Perl already needs infinite lookahead. Anyways, most people
don't care whether a grammar is ambiguous or not -- if we did,
natural human languages would look very different.
People want
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Piers Cawley wrote:
> So, do we have a timetable for when the Perl 6 interpreter is going
> handle closures?
When it uses find_lex/store_lex instead of registers for locals, which
will take a bit of doing, though it's near the top of more than one todo
list.
> Also, conside
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Piers Cawley wrote:
> So, I know that recursion doesn't seem to work in the simple case, but
> at least it reaches runtime. Mutual recursion doesn't even compile
> successfully.
It should do about this, since you're calling it with parens, but for the
moment, you need to dec
This:
On Thu, Sep 12, 2002 at 01:36:14PM +, System Attendant wrote:
> # New Ticket Created by System Attendant
> # Please include the string: [perl #17194]
> # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
> # http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=17194 >
>
>
On Thu, 2002-09-12 at 06:46, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Here's the classic example of mutual recursion:
>
> sub even ($n) {
> given $n {
> when 0 { return 1 };
> default { odd($n-1) };
> }
> }
>
> sub odd ($n) {
> given $n {
> when 0 { return }
> default {
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> Leon Brocard wrote:
>
> > cc: unrecognized option `-shared'
>
> And here probably helps the patch, that was sent to the list sometimes
> ago, replacing LD with LINK in root.in (main Makefile):
>
>
> blib/lib/libparrot$(SO): $(LINK) $(LD_SHARED) $
"Sean O'Rourke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Piers Cawley wrote:
>
>> So, I know that recursion doesn't seem to work in the simple case, but
>> at least it reaches runtime. Mutual recursion doesn't even compile
>> successfully.
>
> It should do about this, since you're calli
Aaron Sherman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 2002-09-12 at 06:46, Piers Cawley wrote:
>
>> Here's the classic example of mutual recursion:
>>
>> sub even ($n) {
>> given $n {
>> when 0 { return 1 };
>> default { odd($n-1) };
>> }
>> }
>>
>> sub odd ($n) {
>>
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Heh. I tried predeclaring using the apocalypse style:
>
>sub odd($n) {...}
>sub even($n) {...}
>
> And that complained about the yadda, even though the functions were
> then fully defined.
At the time I interpreted this as a stub definition, not
On Thu, 2002-09-12 at 09:58, Piers Cawley wrote:
> > sub odd($n);
> >
> > first to declare the function. This gets you a warning about redefining
> > odd, but that's ignorable.
>
> Odd... could have sworn I tried that. And I was under the impression
> that official format for this was C<< sub od
John Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I've decided it's time for me to take another break from this list.
> Not that any of you care, but I think the reason is important.
>
> Due to a silly misunderstanding -- one which could have been easily
> avoided by a simple request for clarification --
On Tue, 10 Sep 2002, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> > 64-bit-int builds appear to be broken. This is from Linux/SPARC with
> > INTVAL='long long'. This configuration used to work quite recently.
Thanks, applied
(by me).
--
Andy Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Ken Fox wrote:
> Luke Palmer wrote:
> > This requires infinite lookahead to parse. Nobody likes infinite
> > lookahead grammars.
>
> Perl already needs infinite lookahead. Anyways, most people
> don't care whether a grammar is ambiguous or not -- if we did,
> natural human
> Here is a patch, that is selfcontained in packfile.c,
s/packfile/packout/
of course, sorry
leo
What does it feel like to be middle aged? (Well, by the biblical count
at least...)
--
Piers
"It is a truth universally acknowledged that a language in
possession of a rich syntax must be in need of a rewrite."
-- Jane Austen?
> Btw, can anyone advise me on getting an actual account on a natively
> 64-bit machine somewhere? I don't really like the model of checking in
> broken code, waiting for the tinderbox to get around to testing it,
> blindly fixing things, and repeating. Especially when the tinderbox
> machines fre
John Porter wrote:
> Immediately whereupon he took advantage of the
> highest-visibility vehicle available to him, the p6i summary, to
> pillory me.
> Now, I tend to think that that was an abuse of power, considering
> he is completely unaccountable to anyone for what he writes there.
This seem
Luke Palmer wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Ken Fox wrote:
> > Perl already needs infinite lookahead.
>
> Really? Where?
Indirect objects need infinite lookahead and they are
in the core language. Hyper operators may need lookahead.
Place holders may need lookahead. User defined rules
will definit
> BTW, there are some parser generators that handle
> ambiguous grammars -- they either support backtracking,
> infinite lookahead, or simultaneously parse all possible
> derivations. In the case of the simultaneous parse, they
> can actually return multiple parse trees and let the
> code generato
From: Andy Dougherty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> > Btw, can anyone advise me on getting an actual account on
> > a natively 64-bit machine somewhere? I don't really like
> > the model of checking in broken code, waiting for the tinderbox
> > to get around to testing it, blindly fixing things,
Ken Fox:
# derivations. In the case of the simultaneous parse, they can
# actually return multiple parse trees and let the code
# generator decide how to interpret things.
Of course, in Perl 6, they'd return a superposition of all possible
parses, and trying to use the superposition would cause
From: Ken Fox [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> BTW, does anybody else find "is rx" funny?
Only because they're not called regular expressions anymore. How about
"px" for "pattern expression"?
-Miko
mail2web - Check your email from the web
# New Ticket Created by Andy Dougherty
# Please include the string: [perl #17202]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=17202 >
The following patch installs a signal handler to try to catch the core
dumps that can
I'm thinking XS thoughts because we're going to need a few external
things at SOME point It would be so nice if Perl 6's XS was part of
the language, rather than an external pre-processor.
Something like:
module somesuch;
use External (language=>"C");
sub chdir(string $path //= $
Aaron Sherman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> I'm thinking XS thoughts because we're going to need a few external
> things at SOME point It would be so nice if Perl 6's XS
> was part of the language, rather than an external pre-processor.
> [ some interesting stuff]
> Thoughts?
Its good
>> xScanMail for Microsoft Exchange has blocked a file xattachment(s).
>is getting trying. Do we have any official public LARTing policy on
>braindead systems that mail back to the list?
There are too many to properly LART. When I see them, I add them to
the Spam filters. Right now we've got 1
Aaron Sherman:
# I'm thinking XS thoughts because we're going to need a few
# external things at SOME point It would be so nice if Perl
# 6's XS was part of the language, rather than an external
# pre-processor.
#
# Something like:
#
# module somesuch;
# use External (language=>"C
On Thu, 2002-09-12 at 20:09, David Whipp wrote:
> Aaron Sherman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > I'm thinking XS thoughts because we're going to need a few external
> > things at SOME point It would be so nice if Perl 6's XS
> > was part of the language, rather than an external pre-proce
On Thu, 2002-09-12 at 21:10, Brent Dax wrote:
> Aaron Sherman:
> # I'm thinking XS thoughts
> # Something like:
> #
> # module somesuch;
> # use External (language=>"C");
> # sub chdir(string $path //= $ENV{HOME}) is
> # external(returns=>'int');
>
> I prefer:
>
> module Sy
What are the restrictions on "is rw"? For example, can it be used with
variables of a particular type? If so, does the parameter passed have to
already be that type? What does this do?
sub process(int $i is rw) { $i++ }
my $x = "10";
process($x);
Does C<$x> become 11? That would requ
On Wed, 2002-09-11 at 19:11, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> that's a few month i'm following this mailing list. i dont like all the changes
> that are being made to perl
Imagine how I felt when Perl 4 came out, with all that silly binary I/O
stuff! I had no idea what Larry had
Aaron Sherman:
# On Thu, 2002-09-12 at 21:10, Brent Dax wrote:
# > Aaron Sherman:
# > # I'm thinking XS thoughts
#
# > # Something like:
# > #
# > # module somesuch;
# > # use External (language=>"C");
# > # sub chdir(string $path //= $ENV{HOME}) is
# > # external(returns=>'int');
#
46 matches
Mail list logo
