Matt Diephouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The following code segfaults when data.txt contains one line of text
> with no newline.
Thanks for reporting, fixed.
leo
Bernhard Schmalhofer via RT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> the library 'libnci.so' is used for testing the Native Call Interface, not
>> for implementing NCI. So the name 'libnci_test.so' make more sense.
Thanks, applied.
leo
Peter Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi there,
> I have included a script that I think addresses TODO #32365 --
> which was, in short, allow easy shortcuts to build information. The
> script generates a file called parrot-config.pbc in the root directory
> that can search through
# New Ticket Created by Matt Diephouse
# Please include the string: [perl #33747]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org:80/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=33747 >
I'm not sure what this should print, but I'm pretty sure the right
answer isn't "8
Now files that end in a newline return an empty string on the last
iteration. (I'm not sure if that's correct.) That looks to be at least
partially to blame for this code's bus error on os x:
.sub main @MAIN
$P0 = open "test.pir", "<"
LOOP:
unless $P0 goto END
$S0 = readline $P0
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 11:37:06AM -0700, Craig DeForest wrote:
> @a[4; 0..5];
> a 1x6 array (probably correct)? Or a 6 array (probably not
> correct)?
For the ignorant among us (such as myself), what is a 6 array? Google
and pdl.perl.org did not yield any immediate answers.
--Dks
--
6 elements..?
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 07:33:11 -0800, David Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 11:37:06AM -0700, Craig DeForest wrote:
>
>
> > @a[4; 0..5];
> > a 1x6 array (probably correct)? Or a 6 array (probably not
> > correct)?
>
> For the ignorant among us (su
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 11:37:06AM -0700, Craig DeForest wrote:
: I just re-read Synopsis 9, which covers PDL-related actions and array
slicing,
: and came to the conclusion that either (A) there's a hole in the syntax as it
: is lain out, (B) I lack sufficient understanding of what has been th
Sorry, too terse :-)
I meant "...a two dimensional array with 1x6 elements (probably correct)? Or
a one dimensional array with 6 elements (probably not correct)?"
Cheers,
Craig
Quoth David Storrs on Monday 10 January 2005 08:33 am,
> On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 11:37:06AM -0700, Craig DeForest wr
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005, Matt Diephouse wrote:
> # New Ticket Created by Matt Diephouse
> # Please include the string: [perl #33747]
> # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
> # http://rt.perl.org:80/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=33747 >
>
> I'm not sure what this should
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
[snip]
> I'm not quite sure, if we need the additional complexity of a
> build-script that generates parrot-config. It's for sure more flexible
> but OTOH we probably just need a few shortcuts, which could be handled
> directly too.
>
> > One thing I di
H... It would be easy to distinguish the slicing cases if it were easier
to distinguish between a number and a list containing just [In fact, that is
more or less how perl5/PDL's arg-list-based slicer ('mslice') does things.]
At the top of Synopsis 9, there's a discussion about exactly that:
Double hmmm That would also supplant the lone '*' wart in indexing
syntax: instead of saying
@array[0..10;*;@x]
you could say
@array[0..10; !; @x]
Presumably, the '!;' would expand to the scalar undef value, which could be
interpreted as "do nothing on this axis", while in
Craig DeForest skribis 2005-01-10 15:56 (-0700):
> @array[0..10; 42!; @x] [[ maps to ]] (<== [0..10], 42 , [EMAIL
> PROTECTED] );
@array[0..10; 1.40500611775288e+51; @x]? ;-)
Juerd
Hi listers,
> > I'm not quite sure, if we need the additional complexity of a
> > build-script that generates parrot-config. It's for sure more flexible
> > but OTOH we probably just need a few shortcuts, which could be handled
> > directly too.
Ok two comments about the complexity of a build scri
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 06:31:24AM -0600, Luke Blanshard wrote:
> David Storrs wrote:
> >Out of curiosity, why are we all spelling 'subject' without a 'c'?
> >Or is 'subjet' a word I'm not familiar with? (Honest question.)
>
> I assume it's a spelling error on the part of the original poster.
> F
16 matches
Mail list logo
