Mac OS X 10.1.5 test results

Hello folks, For those interested, here's what's happening on Mac OS X 10.1.5. Two test logs here -- one for the stable cc (2.95.2-derived), and one for the beta (3.1-derived). First up is the stable. The build gives a lot of warnings about shadowing names from a mach-specific header fil

Re: Unifying invocant and topic naming syntax

Me wrote: > Well, I could argue that c) already exists > in the form of passing parameters in parens. This reminds me of the Law of Demeter. It specifies what your methods should and shouldn't be able to do if you want to build a bright, shiny system that never has bugs, maintains itself, turns w

Re: Superpositions and laziness

Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Piers Cawley wrote: > > [Speculations elided] > >> Which is somewhat dependent on being able to do C. > > Which you can't do, since C is compile-time. So, how would one create a class which inherits from some other class when you don't know what said ot

Re: Hmm...

Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > --- Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> > --- Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> I wonder what would happen if you had a junction of >> >> continuations. Producing something practical

Re: [RFC] unified core.jit

On Wednesday 20 November 2002 04:41, Leopold Toetsch wrote: > Or praeprocessor magic, redifining the Parrot_jit_ops to Parrot_jit_native OK. > > I just committed a renaming for the ppc. > > and others in the meantime - good. > Are these _load & _store different or will they just become _mov. (The

Re: String to Num (was Re: Numeric Literals (Summary))

Dave Storrs writes: > On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 11:50:52PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Michael Lazzaro writes: > > depending on WYW . or the casting may be let to happen in two stages > > : string -> num -> specific num type ,e.g. uint16 > > How about if we got adverbial on the probl

Re: Tinderbox

On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, Steve Fink wrote: > > t/op/lexicals.t 6 1536 66 100.00% 1-6 > t/pmc/multiarra 2 512 32 66.67% 2-3 > t/pmc/scratchpa 3 768 33 100.00% 1-3 I can get these to fail on Li

Re: String concatentation operator

On Mon, 2002-11-18 at 18:10, Dave Whipp wrote: > Why do we need to use preemptive threads? If Parrot is a VM, then surely > the threading can be implemented at its level, or even higher. And what about *lower*? Like down among the CPUs? I want Perl to run 128 times faster on a 128 CPU machine...

Re: String concatentation operator

Martin D Kealey wrote: On Mon, 2002-11-18 at 18:10, Dave Whipp wrote: Why do we need to use preemptive threads? If Parrot is a VM, then surely the threading can be implemented at its level, or even higher. And what about *lower*? Like down among the CPUs? I want Perl to run 128 times faster

Re: Unifying invocant and topic naming syntax

On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 03:09:40PM -0600, Allison Randal wrote: : Larry wrote: : > I'm trying to remember why it was that we didn't always make the first : > argument of any sub the topic by default. I think it had to do with : > the assumption that a bare block should not work with a copy of $_ f

RE: Unifying invocant and topic naming syntax

On Wed, 2002-11-20 at 15:01, Brent Dax wrote: > We need that capability if we're going to have lexically-scoped exports: Whilst it would be useful for pragmatic modules to access anything and everything in the current compilation scope, I submit that access to dynamic scope should (in general) be

Re: Unifying invocant and topic naming syntax

--- Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ... > This might work now, presuming > > sub foo (;$_ = $=) > > (or whatever) is really a binding, and not an assignment. (That's > another reason why //= is *wrong*--it implies assignment.) Umm, that's what it was supposed to do. IOW: sub($pa

Re: Help! Strings -> Numbers

On Tuesday, November 19, 2002, at 06:34 PM, Larry Wall wrote: On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 10:59:02AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote: : (A) Unification of Literal <--> Stringified Numeric Behaviors : : 0123 == "0123" : 0xff == "0xff" : 20#1gj == "20#1gj" : 1e10 == "1e10" : : i

Re: Numeric Literals (Summary 2)

On Monday, November 18, 2002, at 08:34 PM, Martin D Kealey wrote: On Tue, 2002-11-19 at 08:28, Michael Lazzaro wrote: - floating point becomes allowed in explicit radix (and 0b,0c,0x) How can one have floating point if "E" is a valid digit? 0x1.0e1 # 1.054931640625 or 16 ? Oops, sorry

Re: Design Team Issues: Numeric Types

Mike wrote: > > >: (B) Need to know the root of the numeric types > > If it isn't obvious to everyone else, the main (only?) reason to care > about this is when checking/specifying context/args. Assume num means > a double-precision float. > > Simply put: (a) if you pass an to a function def

Re: Numeric Literals (Summary 2)

On Tuesday, November 19, 2002, at 10:26 PM, Dave Storrs wrote: I would assume that 0B0110, 0C0123, and 0X00FF are all equivalent to the forms with lower-case base markers, right? Huh, dunno. Let's ask for a ruling on that. -0xff # ok -0x00ff # ok Are these two identical?

Numeric Literals (Summary 3)

With the latest corrections: --- Numeric Literals --- decimal notation: 123 # int 123 0123 # int 123 123.0 # num 123.0 -123 # int -123 0_1.2_3 # ok _01.23 # wrong 01.23_ # wrong 01_._23 # wrong 1__2# wrong exponen

Re: String to Num (was Re: Numeric Literals (Summary))

Attributions getting confusing, so I have snipped and rewritten: Dave Storrs writes: > > Actually, this would be a good reason to have a function called > > "literal" -- if it went both ways. So, I could do this: > > > >print literal(200+55):hex; # == print "0xff"; > >print litera

Re: String to Num (was Re: Numeric Literals (Summary))

On Wednesday, November 20, 2002, at 11:01 AM, Dave Storrs wrote: Actually, this would be a good reason to have a function called "literal" -- if it went both ways. So, I could do this: print literal(200+55):hex; # == print "0xff"; print literal("0xff)); # == print 255; [EMAIL PROTE

Re: Numeric Literals (Summary 2)

On Tue, 2002-11-19 at 08:28, Michael Lazzaro wrote: > - floating point becomes allowed in explicit radix (and 0b,0c,0x) How can one have floating point if "E" is a valid digit? 0x1.0e1 # 1.054931640625 or 16 ? Has any consideration been given to using letters other than a~f in the second pos

Re: Numeric Literals (Summary)

On Sat, 2002-11-16 at 07:37, Michael Lazzaro wrote: > Due to ambiguities, the proposal to allow floating point in bases other > than 10 is therefore squished. If anyone still wants it, we can ask > the design team to provide a final ruling. Why are we so hung up on spelling floating-point lite

Re: String to Num (was Re: Numeric Literals (Summary))

On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 11:57:33AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote: : and _I'm_ trying to promote the reuse of the old "oct/hex" : functions to do a similar both-way thing, such that: What's a two-way function supposed to return if you pass it something that has both a string and a numeric valu

Re: Numeric Literals (Summary 2)

On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 10:31:06AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote: : : On Tuesday, November 19, 2002, at 10:26 PM, Dave Storrs wrote: : >I would assume that 0B0110, 0C0123, and 0X00FF are all equivalent to : >the forms with lower-case base markers, right? : : Huh, dunno. Let's ask for a ruling on

Re: Numeric Literals (Summary 2)

On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 10:16:41AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote: : We probably couldn't get away with it, though I guess the only one that : really changes is binary. Of course, as you pointed out, we don't : _need_ to have 0b, 0x at all, they're just for backwards brain : compatibility. I thi

Re: Help! Strings -> Numbers

On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 10:05:38AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote: : On Tuesday, November 19, 2002, at 06:34 PM, Larry Wall wrote: : >On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 10:59:02AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote: : >: (A) Unification of Literal <--> Stringified Numeric Behaviors : >: : >: 0123 == "0123" : >

RE: String to Num (was Re: Numeric Literals (Summary)) [x-bayes][ x-adr]

From: Michael Lazzaro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > and _I'm_ trying to promote the reuse of the old "oct/hex" > functions to do a similar both-way thing, such that: [...] > but people just aren't biting, so far. Don't see why > not, I think it's keen. There's the problem Larry ment

Re: Perl 6 Test Organization

On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 08:53:02PM -0800, chromatic wrote: > Brent Dax had a nice suggestion for Perl 6 test organization. I like it > tremendously. > > I repost it here to solicit comments -- to make this work, I'll need to change Did anyone comment on it? It seems a sane to me, and I certainly

Re: Continuations

Paul Johnson wrote: Is it illegal now to use quotes in qw()? Nope. Only as the very first character of a <<...>>. Paging Mr Cozens. ;-) It's just another instance of whitespace significance. print «\"a" "b" "c"»; Presumably without the backslash here too. Maybe. It depends on whet

Re: String concatentation operator

Dan Sugalski wrote: Whups, misunderstanding there. I realize that we need to throw an exception (or a junction of exception and not exception) if evaluating one of the junction members. The question is whether we should evaluate them all regardless and then figure it out at the end, and what t

Re: Continuations elified

Arcadi wrote: > > > > while <$iter> {...} # Iterate until $iter.each returns false? > you mean "Iterate until $iter.next returns false?" Oops. Quite so. what is the difference between the Iterator and lazy array ? am I right that it is just "interface" : lazy array is an iterator

Re: Unifying invocant and topic naming syntax

> Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 12:11:52 -0800 (PST) > From: Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > --- Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > ... > > > This might work now, presuming > > > > sub foo (;$_ = $=) > > > > (or whatever) is really a binding, and not an assignment. (That's > > a

Re: Unifying invocant and topic naming syntax

> $_ = 1; mumble { $_ = 2 }; print; > > will print 1 or 2? Least surprise, visually, is obviously 2. This would be true if bare blocks (even those passed as args) just pick up from the surrounding lexical context. And if that were true, mumble presumably could not do anything about this (wit

Re: Numeric Literals (Summary)

> From: Martin D Kealey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 18 Nov 2002 11:50:14 +1300 > > On Sat, 2002-11-16 at 07:37, Michael Lazzaro wrote: > > Due to ambiguities, the proposal to allow floating point in bases other > > than 10 is therefore squished. If anyone still wants it, we can ask > > the desi

Re: Numeric Literals (Summary 3)

> Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 10:54:18 -0800 > From: Michael Lazzaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > exponential notation: > -1.23e4 # num > -1.23E4 # num (identical) > 1.23_e_4# wrong Lord Larry has ruled that _ can only appear between digits. I, for one, do not see the reasoning beh

Re: String to Num (was Re: Numeric Literals (Summary))

On Wednesday, November 20, 2002, at 12:11 PM, Larry Wall wrote: On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 11:57:33AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote: : and _I'm_ trying to promote the reuse of the old "oct/hex" : functions to do a similar both-way thing, such that: What's a two-way function supposed to return

Re: Numeric Literals (Summary)

On Wednesday, November 20, 2002, at 12:54 PM, Luke Palmer wrote: My opinion: don't allow floating point arbitrary radix. It's uncommon enough that it could be done with a module. It would be trivial with a grammar munge. I tend to agree. The amount of time you're going to want to use float

RE: Numeric Literals (Summary) [x-bayes][x-adr]

From: Luke Palmer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > From: Martin D Kealey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > 10:1.2.3:4.5:6== 12345 > > 2:1:1:1110== 0x6000 > > 60:22.0.-27::-2 == 21.9925 > > I've always wanted to meet The Devil. :) > > Honestly, I can't tell by looking at that what thos

Re: String to Num (was Re: Numeric Literals (Summary))

"Larry Wall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 11:57:33AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote: > : and _I'm_ trying to promote the reuse of the old "oct/hex" > : functions to do a similar both-way thing, such that: > > What's

Re: Numeric Literals (Summary)

"Martin D Kealey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote > I would suggest that exponent-radix should default to the same as radix. > > So > > 10:1.2.3:4.5:6== 12345 > 2:1:1:1110== 0x6000 > 60:22.0.-27::-2 == 21.9925 > For some reason, I find those almost impossible to read. We have co

Re: Help! Strings -> Numbers

On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 10:59:02AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote: > (A) Unification of Literal <--> Stringified Numeric Behaviors > > An old proposal that I can't find anymore suggested that strings should > be converted to a number according to the exact same rules as literals, > such that: > >

Re: Help! Strings -> Numbers

> > my int $i is formatted('%4x'); > > $i = 255; > > print $i;# prints '00ff'; > > > > Anyone care to comment? > > I too don't see much use in the former. The latter puts distance between > the formatting and the thing being formatted and that can't be good. In situations such a

Re: Help! Strings -> Numbers

On Wednesday, November 20, 2002, at 01:45 PM, Tanton Gibbs wrote: my int $i is formatted('%4x'); $i = 255; print $i;# prints '00ff'; I too don't see much use in the former. The latter puts distance between the formatting and the thing being formatted and that can't be good.

License forms

Ok folks, this is your Friendly Neighborhood License-Form Thug calling: For those who came in late, we all need to sign and submit a license form saying that the Perl Documentation Project gets the IP on the documentation we write. The form is here: http://www.snipurl.com/bkt/ It contains complet

Re: Help! Strings -> Numbers

> I'd certainly like a way to easily (1) treat a string as bin/oct/hex, > and (2) stringify a number to bin/oct/hex, because those are two pretty > common cases. I've tried tons of things to get a more general syntax, > and nothing is really working. The string interpolation case is the > most in

Re: License forms

> We seriously need to get those license forms in. Although we aren't > being hardnosed about it yet, eventually we are going to have to draw > a line in the sand and say "If you don't have your license form in, we > can't use anything you submit...so please don't post, because we don't > want eve

Re: Contributor License forms

Hi Dave, Attached is a scanned copy of my contributor form. I also wrote some documentation and tests for the compiler; (in /parrot/languages/perl6/) let me know if you need anything else. Dave Storrs wrote: Greetings all, Allison has asked me to be the coordinator to make sure that we all sen

Re: Perl 6 Test Organization

Has p6Doc produced any tests so far. If so, where are they located? I just want to take a gander at them and see where the holes are. Tanton

Re: License forms

On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 05:55:12PM -0500, Bryan C. Warnock wrote: [eventual need to refuse stuff from unlicensed people] > > Hard and fast? ie, patches, even for a simple typo? Or new work, as > corrections to a licensed document should imply concurrence. I'm very glad to say that I'm not the o

Re: Tinderbox

On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, Simon Glover wrote: > On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, Steve Fink wrote: > > > > t/op/lexicals.t 6 1536 66 100.00% 1-6 > > t/pmc/multiarra 2 512 32 66.67% 2-3 > > t/pmc/scratchpa 3 768 3

Re: Tinderbox

On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 09:33:10PM -0800, Steve Fink wrote: > ### frivolous (Solaris 9 on Sparc; gcc-3.1) ### > > Looks like it crashed in the hashtable test. Why??? > > Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed > --

Re: Tinderbox

On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, Blair Christensen wrote: > On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 09:33:10PM -0800, Steve Fink wrote: > > ### frivolous (Solaris 9 on Sparc; gcc-3.1) ### > > > > Looks like it crashed in the hashtable test. Why??? > > > > Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed > >

Re: Perl 6 Test Organization

"Nicholas Clark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote > On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 08:53:02PM -0800, chromatic wrote: > > Brent Dax had a nice suggestion for Perl 6 test organization. I like it > > tremendously. > > > > I repost it here to solicit comments -- to make this work, I'll need to change > > Did anyon

Re: Perl 6 Test Organization

Dave Whipp wrote: "Nicholas Clark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 08:53:02PM -0800, chromatic wrote: Brent Dax had a nice suggestion for Perl 6 test organization. I like it tremendously. I repost it here to solicit comments -- to make this work, I'll need to ch

Re: Perl 6 Test Organization

On Wednesday, November 20, 2002, at 03:00 PM, Tanton Gibbs wrote: Has p6Doc produced any tests so far. If so, where are they located? I just want to take a gander at them and see where the holes are. Yes, and especially if by "p6Doc" you mean "Joseph". :-) Take a look, his stuff is alread

Re: Perl 6 Test Organization

I get a log of binary goo at the top of conversion.t Does anyone else have this problem? - Original Message - From: "Michael Lazzaro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Tanton Gibbs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 6:47 PM Subject: Re: Perl 6 Test Orga

Re: Perl 6 Test Organization

On Wednesday, November 20, 2002, at 03:49 PM, Tanton Gibbs wrote: I get a log of binary goo at the top of conversion.t Does anyone else have this problem? Yes, it's just a header line -- you can ignore/delete it. The real stuff starts at "#!perl". MikeL

perl6 tests

The tests look Great! A couple of remarks The exponential test in numeric.t I think the last two numbers should be -1230 and -12300 The Infinity test in numeric.t Shouldn't you print $a...if not, why have it? The Binary test in radii.t I think Larry ruled that 0B0110 was an error...it had to be

Re: Perl 6 Test Organization

"David Whipp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] m... > > Here's an updated numbers.t file: I'm not sure that everything is > up-to-date; but I find it clearer. I fixed a few bugs, and merged in the > radii tests. > The attachments on that previous post seemed to go wrong:

Re: Perl 6 Test Organization

Comments on the file: > TODO: Exponential > > 1.23e1 12.3 > 1.23E2 123 > -1.23e3 -1230 > -1.23E4 -12300 I think we should add some negative exponent tests 1.23e-1 .123 (* or is it 0.123?) 12.34e-1 1.234 1.23e-2 .0123 (* or is it 0.0123?) -1.23e-3 -0.00123 -1.23e-4 -0.000123 > TODO: Big Number

Re: Perl 6 Test Organization

On Wednesday, November 20, 2002, at 05:07 PM, Tanton Gibbs wrote: TODO: Octal 0c0777511 0C0777511 -0c0777 -511 0c0_7_7_7 511 No capital C -- is it o or c? It's officially 'o', as of today. MikeL

Re: Perl 6 Test Organization

Tanton Gibbs wrote: > We also might want some way of specifying a test that will cause an > error...for example > 0b19 ERROR > > I'm not exactly sure how to specify this, but it is often important to > document what is not allowed along with what is allowed. I definitely agree that we need some e

Re: Help! Strings -> Numbers

On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 02:46:22PM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote: : On Wednesday, November 20, 2002, at 01:45 PM, Tanton Gibbs wrote: : string interpolation? (where we need it most!) I agree. But it's already there. We can interpolate method calls. : "\$i is $(sprintf('%04x',$i))" Assu

Re: License forms

On Wednesday, November 20, 2002, at 03:34 PM, Dave Storrs wrote: On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 05:55:12PM -0500, Bryan C. Warnock wrote: [eventual need to refuse stuff from unlicensed people] Hard and fast? ie, patches, even for a simple typo? Or new work, as corrections to a licensed document shou

Re: Numeric Literals (Summary)

On Thu, 2002-11-21 at 09:54, Luke Palmer wrote: > I've always wanted to meet The Devil. :) You're welcome :-) > Honestly, I can't tell by looking at that what those are supposed to > mean. And I'm not putting any numbers that ugly into my Perl soup. > Perl 6 is trying to I obfuscation. I was af

Re: Coroutines, continuations, and iterators -- oh, my! (Was: Re: Continuations elified)

Austin Hastings wrote: for each $dance: { ^ note colon 1- Why is the colon there? Is this some sub-tile syntactical new-ance that I missed in a prior message, or a new thing? It's the way we mark an indirect object in Perl 6. 2- Why is the colon necessary? Isn't the "

Re: Superpositions and laziness

Piers Cawley wrote: C is compile-time. So, how would one create a class which inherits from some other class when you don't know what said other class is until runtime? Use Perl5-ish classes, or an C. Does this work: class { push @ISA, $class; ... } I sincerely hope

Re: Unifying invocant and topic naming syntax

On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 04:20:07PM -0600, Me wrote: : > $_ = 1; mumble { $_ = 2 }; print; : > : > will print 1 or 2? : : Least surprise, visually, is obviously 2. : : This would be true if bare blocks (even : those passed as args) just pick up from : the surrounding lexical context. And if :

RE: Superpositions and laziness

Piers Cawley: # So, how would one create a class which inherits from some # other class when you don't know what said other class is # until runtime? AUTOLOAD! *ducks* --Brent Dax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> @roles=map {"Parrot $_"} qw(embedding regexen Configure) "If you want to propagate an outrage

TERN-discuss mailing list finally available

The brazen heresy continues... http://mail.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/TERN-discuss

Native function calls

I'm adding this code in now (sorry I've been behind on p6i mail--hopefully I'll catch up in a big dump today). Here's the sketch. One new op: bnc Pw, Px, Sy, Sz which builds up a native call pmc that can be invoked. W is the new PMC for the function (we create it), X is a handle to a dlopen

Re: Native function calls

At 4:41 PM -0500 11/20/02, Dan Sugalski wrote: One new op: bnc Pw, Px, Sy, Sz which builds up a native call pmc that can be invoked. W is the new PMC for the function (we create it), X is a handle to a dlopened library, Y is the function name, and Z is the signature. This isn't true, it tu

Re: Help! Strings -> Numbers

Larry wrote: > "\$i is $i.format('%04x')" > "\$i is $i.form('%04x')" > "\$i is $i.frm('%04x')" > "\$i is $i.as('%04x')" > "\$i is $i.f('%04x')" If we keep it a method, then we do have the added benefit of being able to override it for custom classes...something that sprintf doe

Re: Perl 6 Test Organization

Dave Whipp wrote: Tanton Gibbs wrote: We also might want some way of specifying a test that will cause an error...for example 0b19 ERROR I'm not exactly sure how to specify this, but it is often important to document what is not allowed along with what is allowed. I definitely agree th

Re: Perl 6 Test Organization

> >I think that it'd also be nice to get some consensus on which format of test > >we should maintain: the table version, or the raw-code version. > > > > I think the consensus when Chromatic brought the subject > up was to use the testing system that Parrot uses; however, > your table version is k

Re: perl6 tests

Tanton Gibbs wrote: The tests look Great! A couple of remarks The exponential test in numeric.t I think the last two numbers should be -1230 and -12300 Woops. The Infinity test in numeric.t Shouldn't you print $a...if not, why have it? Double woops :) The Binary test in radii.t I th

Re: Perl 6 Test Organization

Tanton Gibbs wrote: Comments on the file: TODO: Exponential 1.23e1 12.3 1.23E2 123 -1.23e3 -1230 -1.23E4 -12300 I think we should add some negative exponent tests 1.23e-1 .123 (* or is it 0.123?) 12.34e-1 1.234 1.23e-2 .0123 (* or is it 0.0123?) -1.23e-3 -0.00123 -1.23e-4 -0.000123

Re: Perl 6 Test Organization

Michael Lazzaro wrote: On Wednesday, November 20, 2002, at 05:07 PM, Tanton Gibbs wrote: TODO: Octal 0c0777511 0C0777511 -0c0777 -511 0c0_7_7_7 511 No capital C -- is it o or c? It's officially 'o', as of today. Alright, fixed. MikeL Joseph F. Ryan [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Updated tests.

Alright, I've incorporated everyone's suggestions and fixes, so everything should be correct now. Next, we need bool types, bool type conversion, output_isnt, and error tests. I'll get started on the error tests this week. Updated tests at: http://jryan.perlmonk.org/images/literals.tar.gz Josep

Re: Perl 6 Test Organization

I wrote: >I think that it'd also be nice to get some consensus on which format of > test we should maintain: the table version, or the raw-code version. "Joseph F. Ryan" wrote: > I think the consensus when Chromatic brought the subject > up was to use the testing system that Parrot uses; however,

Re: Perl 6 Test Organization

> If people are happy to use these data-oriented test-scripts, then I'm > happy to examine various groups of tests and find their abstractions. > It's just basic data-modeling, applied to source code. By modeling > each file independently, I avoid the problems associated with > infinitely flexible

RE: Perl 6 Test Organization

Joseph F. Ryan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > Well, thats not exactly true. I've been following along the > discussion > on P6-doc, and I've been updating the tests to match the > current status. > > Although I'm not sure of their accuracy (My posts to p6-doc about them > have been pretty

Re: Perl 6 Test Organization

"Tanton Gibbs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So, we can either use one generic test script, and write the perl6 > ourselves...or > we can create N specific test scripts which generate the perl6 for us given > a particular data set and after we have written the perl6 ourselves. Sounds > like duplicat

Re: Perl 6 Test Organization

> I don't think I've got the energy to debate basic SW development philosophy: > just do a google on "merciless refactoring" or "agile software development" > (or even "extreme programming"). I don't want to debate SW philosophy, because it is just that, philosophy...everyone has his/her own. I c

Re: TERN-discuss mailing list finally available

At 9:07 PM -0600 11/20/02, david wrote: The brazen heresy continues... http://mail.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/TERN-discuss Perl 5, or perl 6? -- Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski

Re: String to Num (was Re: Numeric Literals (Summary))

On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 12:11:21PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote: > On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 11:57:33AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote: > : and _I'm_ trying to promote the reuse of the old "oct/hex" > : functions to do a similar both-way thing, such that: > > What's a two-way function supposed to ret

Re: String to Num (was Re: Numeric Literals (Summary))

On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 01:23:04PM -0800, Dave Whipp wrote: > > "Larry Wall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 11:57:33AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote: > > : and _I'm_ trying to promote the reuse of the old "oct/hex

Re: Help! Strings -> Numbers

On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 05:51:17PM -0500, Tanton Gibbs wrote: > > It's going to be hard to beat sprintf( "%x", $i ) for clarity or > conciseness. Unfortunately, it's pretty easy to beat it for readability. It's also a holdover from C, an ancestor language that we are (at least to a degree) tryi

Re: Help! Strings -> Numbers

> I actually rather like MikeL's suggestion for the unary ops; clear, > concise, and highly readable. And look: > > my str $s = sprintf("%x", $i);# 30 characters > my str $s = hex $i; # 19 characters > my $s = ~hex $i; # 16 characters I think these are good, but

Re: Help! Strings -> Numbers

> As a tangent...one of the things that has bothered me about "but" and > "is" for properties since the beginning is that they make for > excessively long code. Does this bother anyone else? > > --Dks Properties have bothered me, but for a different reason. It appears that everyone's answer to

[PATCH] Function <=> Data Pointer Casts in nci.c

This should correct warnings on a few compilers and outright breakage on tcc. It uses the D2FPTR/F2DPTR macros to cast between data and function pointers where needed. --Josh Index: nci.c === RCS file: /cvs/public/parrot/nci.c,v r

RE: Native function calls

Dan Sugalski: # which builds up a native call pmc that can be invoked. W is the new # PMC for the function (we create it), X is a handle to a dlopened # library, Y is the function name, and Z is the signature. OK, clarification on something please. Is this essentially XS, or something more prim

RE: Unifying invocant and topic naming syntax

Martin D Kealey: # On Wed, 2002-11-20 at 15:01, Brent Dax wrote: # > We need that capability if we're going to have lexically-scoped # > exports: # # Whilst it would be useful for pragmatic modules to access # anything and everything in the current compilation scope, I # submit that access to d

Re: TERN-discuss mailing list finally available

david wrote: The brazen heresy continues... http://mail.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/TERN-discuss Are these people serious? What on earth is the point?

Re: String concatentation operator

[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ine.net> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Tinderbox

Andy Dougherty wrote: A bit more ... In particular, on Solaris, I've been able to track down one way of triggering the the t/op/lexicals.t failure to list.c. If I compile list.c without any optimization, the test passes. If I compile just the list_new function in list.c with the lowest optimiz