Re: [perl #27694] PATCH] Index access and get_string for Iterator PMC

2004-06-16 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Bernhard Schmalhofer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have been looking into integer keyed access to the Iterator PMC. Applied - finally as the patch seems to match Dan's iterator proposal. Thanks, leo

[perl #30294] [PATCH] improve allocation scheme for resizable arrays

2004-06-16 Thread via RT
# New Ticket Created by Matt Fowles # Please include the string: [perl #30294] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # http://rt.perl.org:80/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=30294 > All~ This patch implements the better allocation scheme of doubling array capacity,

Re: Strings. Finally.

2004-06-16 Thread Damien Neil
On Jun 14, 2004, at 1:54 PM, Dan Sugalski wrote: Parrot provides code points for all graphemes, even for those character sets/encodings which don't inherently do so. Most sets that have variable-length encodings use an escape sequence scheme--the value of the first byte in a character determines wh

Re: Slices and iterators

2004-06-16 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > *) We consider ways to make slices. I can see ops, or I can see basic > functions. Either is fine, depends on how often the things are used. I'll start from the end of the proposal. What about just extending the keyed syntax: Px = Py[0] # ke

Re: [perl #30240] t/pmc/threads.t 8-9 fail, only under harness

2004-06-16 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > t/pmc/threads..dubious > Test returned status 3 (wstat 768, 0x300) > DIED. FAILED tests 6, 8-9 > If I run just this test under the harness, or if I run it standalone, it > passes. eg Do they succeed, when running standalone with --g

Re: Teapots!

2004-06-16 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Nick Glencross wrote: Guys, Although my wife is totally underwhelmed by this, here's a nice SDL demo. It needs some more work, but I won't get time to visit it again in the next week. Looks really great. Should that go into CVS as an example? leo

Re: [perl #30294] [PATCH] improve allocation scheme for resizable arrays

2004-06-16 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 3:10 PM -0700 6/15/04, Matt Fowles (via RT) wrote: This patch implements the better allocation scheme of doubling array capacity, for the Resizable*Array pmcs. Also, includes a slight change to tests that will test a wider range of behavior. While doubling has some issues when an array gets big

Re: Slices and iterators

2004-06-16 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 11:25 AM +0200 6/16/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote: Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: *) We consider ways to make slices. I can see ops, or I can see basic functions. Either is fine, depends on how often the things are used. I'll start from the end of the proposal. What about just extending t

Strings internals

2004-06-16 Thread Dan Sugalski
Okay, now that we've got the bytecode-visible stuff specified, I want to spec the internals some, and start getting things migrated over to it. (This should allow us to make ICU optional as well, for folks that only want ASCII/Latin-x/EBCDIC enabled) Once again, we're going with vtables, like t

Re: Teapots!

2004-06-16 Thread nickg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > A week later, I've finally checked the new SDL Parrot code into CVS. Nice one Chromatic. I'm not sure whether the datafile ever did make it onto the mailing list! I got it by email, but Google doesn't seem to have it. Perhaps it looked like spam or a virus... I'll

Simple trinary ops?

2004-06-16 Thread Dan Sugalski
I'm wondering if it'd be useful enough to be worthwhile to have non-flowcontrol min/max ops. Something like: min P1, P2, P3 max P1, P2, P3 where P1 ends up with the lesser (or greater) of P2 and P3. On the one hand this'd make some of the code I'm generating now simpler, but on the other i

Re: Strings internals

2004-06-16 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 4:30 PM + 6/16/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do we want a Normalization function here as well. If you have that you can use a binary compare (at least for eq/ne). Yeah, we probably do. The question is always "Which normalization" since there are at least four for Unicode and two for ISO-20

Re: Slices and iterators

2004-06-16 Thread Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon
Dan Sugalski wrote: Which reminds me--we need to have a syntax to distinguish between key types. Perl already gives us two of the three: Px[Iy] Px{Sy} For the third, I suggest we extend the analogy: Px -- Brent "Dax" Royal-Gordon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Perl and Parrot hacker Oceania has a

Re: Simple trinary ops?

2004-06-16 Thread Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon
Dan Sugalski wrote: min P1, P2, P3 max P1, P2, P3 Opinions? Subroutine, man, subroutine. NCI if you need it to be fast. -- Brent "Dax" Royal-Gordon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Perl and Parrot hacker Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.

Re: Strings internals

2004-06-16 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 5:07 PM + 6/16/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah, but I believe that at least Unicode has one of the four that they suggest be used for non-locale specific comparisons (canonical decomposition form). So pick that one for the core and provide the others (if necessary) as library functions.

Re: Slices and iterators

2004-06-16 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 10:06 AM -0700 6/16/04, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote: Dan Sugalski wrote: Which reminds me--we need to have a syntax to distinguish between key types. Perl already gives us two of the three: Px[Iy] Px{Sy} For the third, I suggest we extend the analogy: Px Except it breaks really re

Re: Simple trinary ops?

2004-06-16 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 10:08 AM -0700 6/16/04, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote: Dan Sugalski wrote: min P1, P2, P3 max P1, P2, P3 Opinions? Subroutine, man, subroutine. NCI if you need it to be fast. Feh on a subroutine--it's three or four ops with a few branches. Which was the point--it eliminates the branches

Re: Strings internals

2004-06-16 Thread mark . a . biggar
Do we want a Normalization function here as well. If you have that you can use a binary compare (at least for eq/ne). -- Mark Biggar [EMAIL PROTECTED] > The charset vtable needs to handle get/set grapheme, get/set > substring, up/down/titlecase, and (possibly) comparison. Charsets > also ha

Re: Strings internals

2004-06-16 Thread mark . a . biggar
Yeah, but I believe that at least Unicode has one of the four that they suggest be used for non-locale specific comparisons (canonical decomposition form). So pick that one for the core and provide the others (if necessary) as library functions. -- Mark Biggar [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: Slices and iterators

2004-06-16 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 7:48 PM +0200 6/16/04, Eirik Berg Hanssen wrote: Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: At 10:06 AM -0700 6/16/04, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote: Dan Sugalski wrote: Which reminds me--we need to have a syntax to distinguish between key types. Perl already gives us two of the three: Px[

Re: Slices and iterators

2004-06-16 Thread Eirik Berg Hanssen
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > At 10:06 AM -0700 6/16/04, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote: >>Dan Sugalski wrote: >>>Which reminds me--we need to have a syntax to distinguish between key types. >> >>Perl already gives us two of the three: >> Px[Iy] >> Px{Sy} >> >>For the third, I

[perl #30314] [PATCH] Use a generated makefile for languages/cola

2004-06-16 Thread via RT
# New Ticket Created by Andy Dougherty # Please include the string: [perl #30314] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # http://rt.perl.org:80/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=30314 > This patch changes the languages/cola/Makefile from a manually-generated one to one

Re: Simple trinary ops?

2004-06-16 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm wondering if it'd be useful enough to be worthwhile to have > non-flowcontrol min/max ops. Something like: > min P1, P2, P3 > max P1, P2, P3 Which cmp operation of the three we have? I smell opcode bloat. > On the one hand this'd make some of

Re: Simple trinary ops?

2004-06-16 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 8:24 PM +0200 6/16/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote: Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I'm wondering if it'd be useful enough to be worthwhile to have non-flowcontrol min/max ops. Something like: min P1, P2, P3 max P1, P2, P3 Which cmp operation of the three we have? I smell opcode b

Re: Slices and iterators

2004-06-16 Thread Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon
Dan Sugalski wrote: Yeah, but given that this code will be generated by compilers 90+% of the time... the assembly generation and parsing of the assembly's easier with the postfix notation. My understanding is that compilers will generate an AST, not textual PIR. Thus, we are looking for a nota

Re: Teapots!

2004-06-16 Thread Nick Glencross
Leopold Toetsch wrote: Looks really great. Should that go into CVS as an example? Obviously I'd be honoured if it were, and this would prompt me to revisit the backface culling. My original plan was to sort all the faces from front to back and draw them in this order. Then I can create a data s

Re: More on slices and iterators

2004-06-16 Thread martin
On Tue, 15 Jun 2004, Dan Sugalski wrote: > So, given that, should plain scalars act as iterators holding a single > value and implement the iterator protocol? That'd be messy if two things tried to take an iterator over the same scalar as the same time. On the other hand if it created an iterator