Togos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 1) Have a version of the binary vtable
>>methods that create the destination PMC
> Well, as I was saying last summer, #1 is really what
> the add instruction should have done in the first
> place, as that would make it behave the same way as it
> does for i
The Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 2004-03-28
... and we're back! Another interesting week in Perl 6. Your Summarizer
even wrote some [parrot] code and it's been simply ages since he did
that. In accordance with ancient custom, we'll start the summary with
perl6-internals.
Bu
"Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I think the ¥(yen) suggestion is great, especially since it does indeed
>> look like a zipper. Still, I would very much like an ASCII infix
>> alternative for zip().
>
>> I propose z as the ASCII alternative for the infix zip operator (either
>> broken
> This has come up before and the discussion
> always semi-warnocks, but
Yeah...
> 1) Have a version of the binary vtable
>methods that create the destination PMC
> 2) Make a universal assignment PMC that
>takes on the characteristics
>of the RHS of the assignment
> 3) Have a "this
Piers Cawley wrote:
Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Out of interest, why do we have distinct register and user stacks?
User stack entries are typed and you save and restore one item per
operation. The register backing stores first took 32 registers of one
kind (now 16 or 32). To get
Hi,
tar xzf err13.tgz
cd err13
../parrot languages/EBNF/main.imc ebnf/precedence1.ebnf
chrashes, running parrot with -G works.
jens
(gdb) r --gc-debug languages/EBNF/main.imc ebnf/precedence1.ebnf
Starting program: /home/jrieks/projekte/parrot/parrot --gc-debug
languages/EBNF/main.imc ebnf/pr
Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 8:40 AM +0100 3/27/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
A short question WRT implementation: shouldn't all MMD functions just
use one function slot? You now seem to duplicate the whole table.
Yes, I do.
Did you consider ussng PMCs as instead of plain function pointers. As
outlined
At 8:16 PM +0200 3/29/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 8:40 AM +0100 3/27/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
A short question WRT implementation: shouldn't all MMD functions just
use one function slot? You now seem to duplicate the whole table.
Yes, I do.
Did you consider ussng PMCs as
Piers Cawley skribis 2004-03-29 16:33 (+0100):
> You'll really confuse the deep functional programmers if you do that,
> for whom the term 'Y operator' means something very different
Probably, but is that a good reason to not use it?
Many Perl 6 things will already really confuse Perl 5 programme
At 8:40 AM +0100 3/27/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So, I'm doing these, because I need 'em, and we might as well get the
things in now. For the record, these things will be called as
functions (not methods), with three parameters, so the signature
looks lik
At 2:05 PM -0800 3/26/04, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
This does mean checking if dest == NULL at the beginning of each
vtable function, but other than that, it's fairly clean.
That's one of the things I was trying to avoid in the original
design, though. It means a null check in every vtable
On Mon, 2004-03-29 at 10:23, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> Ultimately it ought to be doable to have the JIT,
> on JIT capable systems, construct custom C function headers which
> means we could skip the second table *and* not bother with PMCs or
> anything equally fat for the function entries.
Would b
At 10:29 AM -0800 3/29/04, chromatic wrote:
On Mon, 2004-03-29 at 10:23, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Ultimately it ought to be doable to have the JIT,
on JIT capable systems, construct custom C function headers which
means we could skip the second table *and* not bother with PMCs or
anything equally f
Hi,
a friend of mine has a quite good collection of strange hardware, most of them
useable and running some kind of BSD.
I tried Parrot today on an Alpha machine running OpenBSD 3.5 beta and, just in
case you're still interested, the results are here:
http://thiesen.org/parrottest/alpha-openbsd-
Hi,
a friend of mine has a quite good collection of strange hardware, most of them
useable and running some kind of BSD.
I tried Parrot today on an Alpha machine running OpenBSD 3.5 beta and, just in
case you're still interested, the results are here:
http://thiesen.org/parrottest/alpha-openbsd-
Hurm. this didn't make it to the list - Stripping out the attachments,
see http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=28035 for those.
Regards.
Begin forwarded message:
With input (and some code, thanks!) from Jérôme, I've made some
progress here. Both tcl and befunge should shortly be happ
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 8:46 AM +0100 3/23/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>>Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
> And what control stack? The continuation chain is the control
> stack, surely?
Nope. There's t
Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>> C becomes C if only P-registers are used. Saving only
>>> 3 or 5 registers isn't possible yet. We have no opcodes for that.
>
>> save Pn
>> save Pm
>
> Well
At 3:55 PM +0100 3/29/04, Piers Cawley wrote:
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I finally figured out why the windows machine wasn't showing in the
tinderbox, and fixed that. (System dates. D'oh!) We now have (again) a
reliable windows machine building parrot for test, both under Cygwin
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I finally figured out why the windows machine wasn't showing in the
> tinderbox, and fixed that. (System dates. D'oh!) We now have (again) a
> reliable windows machine building parrot for test, both under Cygwin and
> Visual Studio/.NET (though it builds
At 11:12 AM +0100 3/27/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[ mmd functions ]
Another question:
,--[ pdd15 ]--
|While vtable methods may take a continuation, those
|continuations may not escape the
At 10:14 PM + 3/27/04, Harry Jackson wrote:
In PDD 15 it says
Creating a new class with attributes
Adding the attributes a and b to the new class Foo:
D'oh! Docs are wrong, I'll go fix 'em.
--
Dan
--"it's like this"--
Dan Sugalski wrote:
You've got me confused here.
Well, the question is: Is it allowed to create a continuation in one
subroutine with the destination label being in a different subroutine?
.sub _f1
label = get_addr dest_label
_f2(label)
...
dest_label:
.end
.sub _f2
.param int
At 7:38 AM +0100 3/27/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This becomes a bit less efficient when we're looking at intermediate
values of expressions. Something like:
a = b + c + d
turns to
new $P0, SomeIntermediateType
add $P0, b, c
add a, $
At 9:40 PM +0200 3/29/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
You've got me confused here.
Well, the question is: Is it allowed to create a continuation in one
subroutine with the destination label being in a different
subroutine?
Oh, OK.
Erm. No. Mostly.
Subs must be considered self-co
# New Ticket Created by JÃrgen BÃmmels
# Please include the string: [perl #27983]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org:80/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=27983 >
Hi,
over a year ago the cache element was removed from the PMC-struct. For
compat
At 9:42 AM -0800 3/26/04, "Jºrgen" "Bmmels" (via RT) wrote:
This patch removes this #define cache hack and uses the
accessor-macros PMC_*_val instead.
Ok to commit?
If we fully compile and test (do a languages-test
too, though only C compile problems matter there)
then yes, go ahead.
--
Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 8:16 PM +0200 3/29/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Did you consider ussng PMCs as instead of plain function pointers. As
outlined a NCI, C, and PASM Sub PMC would be equally just invoke()d.
Yeah, I did. You end up with a twofold problem there--not only do you
have extra indir
Dan Sugalski wrote:
[ cvs ci library/vtable_constants.pasm ]
Isn't working IMHO. C<.const int ..> is PIR syntax. *And* that file
could be easily auto-created like almost all inside
F
leo
At 10:28 PM +0200 3/29/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
[ cvs ci library/vtable_constants.pasm ]
Isn't working IMHO. C<.const int ..> is PIR syntax. *And* that file
could be easily auto-created like almost all inside
F
Ah, damn, that's what I get for not double-checking my working
At 10:24 PM +0200 3/29/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 8:16 PM +0200 3/29/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Did you consider ussng PMCs as instead of plain function pointers.
As outlined a NCI, C, and PASM Sub PMC would be equally just
invoke()d.
Yeah, I did. You end up with a twofo
Well I just realized something. Or at least realized a
better way to explain it.
Let's say we have a HLL that is mapping HL variables
to Parrot registers.
someint1 = someint2 + someint3
will, of course, map to something like
$I1 = $I2 + $I3
Now, if those ints were replaced by PMC reference
Hi all,
With the improved object system in place, I've been porting the existing
SDL Parrot bindings. Here's a sample program that draws the friendly
blue rectangle again:
.pcc_sub _main non_prototyped, @MAIN
load_bytecode "library/sdl_app.imc"
load_bytecode "library/sdl_rect.imc
# New Ticket Created by Adam Thomason
# Please include the string: [perl #28079]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org:80/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=28079 >
Attached patch fixes a number of cast warnings issued by Intel C++ 8.0.
This greatly
34 matches
Mail list logo
