Andy Lester wrote:
>
> > How am I going to test this ?
>
> Take a look at Test::Warn for warnings, and Test::Exception for errors.
>
> I think qa.perl.org needs a listing of Test::* modules so that people
> know what's available.
http://search.cpan.org/search?query=Test-&mode=dist
lists many o
On Fri, 28 Nov 2003, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
> Andy Lester wrote:
> >
> > > How am I going to test this ?
> >
> > Take a look at Test::Warn for warnings, and Test::Exception for errors.
> >
> > I think qa.perl.org needs a listing of Test::* modules so that people
> > know what's available.
>
>
lists many of them, but maybe a more comprehensive list would
categorize
them in 'test modules that use the Test::Builder framework', 'test
report utils'
(such as Test::Harness), 'mod_perl related tests', etc.
Iain Truskett and I are working on such a list right now. Actually,
he's done working
Cory Spencer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there any way in PASM to determine whether or not two PMC's share the
> same memory address?
Not yet. We have the vtable methods but the opcodes are missing.
We have:
Op vtable Meaning
- is_same PMCs are ident
- is_equal PMCs are equ
As outlined some time ago, when ops.num made it into the core, we need
fix assigned PMC class enums too. (Changed class enums invalidate
existing PBC files).
1) lib/Parrot/PMC.pm is the canonical source of PMC class => enum mapping.
2) the class enums should be numbered so that "base" classes co
Ibotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i am interested, if there is a method (for a PMC), that is automagically
> called, whenever a called method is not existent.
If you are speaking of vtable->method, yes - the method in default.pmc
is called.
If you are speaking of objects, there will be such a fe
>> i am interested, if there is a method (for a PMC), that is automagically
>> called, whenever a called method is not existent.
>
> If you are speaking of vtable->method, yes - the method in default.pmc
> is called.
can a pmc override this method?
> If you are speaking of objects, there will be
Ibotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> i am interested, if there is a method (for a PMC), that is automagically
>>> called, whenever a called method is not existent.
>>
>> If you are speaking of vtable->method, yes - the method in default.pmc
>> is called.
> can a pmc override this method?
There i
Can someone add a pause to parrot, presumably similar to the existing
-. option, only at the end, if an error occurs.
Pete
On Fri, 28 Nov 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> Op vtable Meaning
> - is_same PMCs are ident
> - is_equal PMCs are equivalent, holding the same value
> Y cmp cmp PMCs
> - cmp_num cmp PMCs numerically
> - cmp_string cmp PMCs as strings
>
> Proposals for opcode nam
On Fri, 28 Nov 2003, Cory Spencer wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Nov 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>
> > Op vtable Meaning
> > - is_same PMCs are ident
> > - is_equal PMCs are equivalent, holding the same value
> > Y cmp cmp PMCs
> > - cmp_num cmp PMCs numerically
> > - cm
> > On Fri, 28 Nov 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> >
> > > Op vtable Meaning
> > > - is_same PMCs are ident
> > > - is_equal PMCs are equivalent, holding the same value
> > > Y cmp cmp PMCs
> > > - cmp_num cmp PMCs numerically
> > > - cmp_string cmp PMCs as strin
On Fri, Nov 28, 2003 at 10:27:45AM -0700 it came to pass that Cory Spencer wrote:
>
> > > On Fri, 28 Nov 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> > >
> > > > Op vtable Meaning
> > > > - is_same PMCs are ident
> > > > - is_equal PMCs are equivalent, holding the same value
> > > > Y cmp
> I think this is definitely something we should do if we want to confuse
> people as much as possible :-)
This is likely true, seeing as I *still* have troubles keeping the various
Lisp eq/eql/equal/equalp's straight. ;)
> I would therefore vote that we keep these opcodes as verbose as
> possib
> We're already using 'eq' to perform equality testing, and in the interests
> of maintaining a consistent design I would choose to stick with something
> eq-related as opposed to changing it to 'same'.
>
> eqaddr/eqval? eq_addr/eq_val? eq_address/eq_value?
Oops, correction there - I'd forgotte
Jos Visser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would therefore vote that we keep these opcodes as verbose as
> possible. So no eq/eql/equal, but rather
> same_address/same_content/compare/compare_as_num/compare_as_string.
Or as verbose as needed [1]:
ident, eq, , _num, _string for in (lt le gt ge)
Larry Wall writes:
> : if $x.foo { print "$x has property foo" }
> : $x.bar = 1; # Or $x = $x but bar
>
> Or maybe the .bar notation is only for rvalues, and to create a
> property you have to say:
>
> $x but= bar;
I think that would be an unPerlish restriction; people who know ho
17 matches
Mail list logo
