- Array, PerlArray, Hash, PerlHash clone is a deep copy
- {Fixed,Resizable}PMCArray is a shallow copy
The deep copy of Array and Hash breaks (infinite recursion) with
self-referential structures.
I think the deep copy should be a shallow copy.
Deep copy can always be done in a safe way by freeze/
Bernhard Schmalhofer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> the example 'thr-primes.imc' should not use the PerlUndef PMC, as the
> Perl* PMCs are being moved into 'dynclasses'.
> Replacing the PerlUndef PMC with the standard Undef PMC mostly works.
> However, after 499 is found as a prime, an infin
# New Ticket Created by Leopold Toetsch
# Please include the string: [perl #34394]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=34394 >
The splice opcode has the functionality of the perl5 function, so that
should be ra
If any of you are willing, I would appreciate any general feedback on
my first complete module port to Perl 6, including test suite,
particularly if any parts don't look like proper Perl 6.
I haven't tried executing it yet, since Pugs lacks some features.
But it will be easier on them if what t
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It would behave like a tied sub (or method), with a .dispatch method
to decide which of the contained routines should be called this
particular time. Manhattan would be the default. However, one can
override the dispatch logic; implementing Luke's Patterns idea, for
exa
Simon Glover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ... However, if we
> want to create an anonymous subclass, using the 2-argument form of the
> subclass op, then we hit a problem -- the code:
> newclass P0, "City"
> subclass P1, P0
> newclass P2, "State"
> subclass P3, P2
> en
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Leopold Toetsch writes:
>> All infix operators are multi subs. I can't imagine that we want to pay
>> the penalty for simple operations like:
>>
>> $a = $b + $c
>>
>> to inspect the values of operands, constraints, rules and what not.
> Having written se
Rod Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It seems to me that there are several advantages to making a group of
> multi with the same short name a single object, of type
> MultiSub|MultiMethod, which internally holds references to the all the
> various routines that share that short name.
Discussion
On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 10:11:09PM -0500, Michael Graham wrote:
>
> > > Would this make it possible to run many test scripts (each with its own
> > > plan) within the same perl process? 'Cos that would be nifty.
> >
> > Yes. Though beyond testing testing libraries I don't know why you'd want to
Millsa Erlas wrote:
What is the current status of the development of the Parrot and the Perl
6 compiler written in Perl? I hope that producing a Perl 6 compiler
written in Perl 6 and the Parrot VM is still a high priority and is
being actively developed as the premier compiler and VM for the Per
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 03:38:52PM -0600, Rod Adams wrote:
> There lingers the case of:
>
>use Foo; # from above, exports &bar is MMD::Random
>
>multi sub bar {...}
>
> Does this generate an error, since one could expect this particular &bar
> to be Manhattan? Or does it assume Rando
Larry Wall wrote:
That's...sick... I love it. *Please* don't tell Damian.
Well there are some people who consider it quite sane :)
http://www.cduce.org/papers/icalp04.pdf
Abstract:
This paper studies the problem of matching sequences against
regular expressions in order to produce structured val
I gave a talk on Perl 6 Junctions at the Thousand Oaks Perl Mongers
meeting last night
http://www.hcoop.net/~terry/perl/talks/p6-junctions/index.html
and two questions/desires came out of it:
1: will it be possible to know which element of a junction is
currently being used? E.g.:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What about multi subs? They can be defined everywhere. Given:
multi sub *foo(A $a, B $b) {...}
Is this something like:
%globals{"foo"} --> MultiSub{"foo_A_B" => Sub, ...}
What about a not so global multi:
multi sub foo(A $a, B $b) {...}
Thanks for clarifying,
leo
Uh
HaloO Luke,
you wrote:
The words 'covariant' and 'contravariant' in this context seem like
voodoo math. Please explain what you mean.
'Co' means together like in coproduction. And 'contra' is the opposite
as in counterproductive. With instanciating parametric types the question
arises how a subtyp
Failed TestStatus Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed
imcc/t/imcpasm/opt1.t 1 256491 2.04% 48
t/dynclass/pybuiltin.t 5 1280 65 83.33% 1-2, 4-6
t/dynclass/pyclass.t
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005, [UTF-8] Thomas SandlaÃ~_ wrote:
'Co' means together like in coproduction. And 'contra' is the opposite
'Streaming of digestive byproducts'? ;-)
Sorry for the OT - couldn't resist! This pun fir
At 17:53 +0100 3/10/05, Thomas Sandlaß wrote:
>'Co' means together like in coproduction. And 'contra' is the opposite
>as in counterproductive. With instanciating parametric types the question
>arises how a subtype relation between instanciating types propagates
>to the template. E.g with Int <: Nu
> At 17:53 +0100 3/10/05, Thomas Sandlaß wrote:
[request for clarification of 'covariant' and 'contravariant' usage]
> >'Co' means together like in coproduction. And 'contra' is the opposite
> >as in counterproductive. With instanciating parametric types the question
> >arises how a subtype relatio
I am sorry for mystification. Without my cheat 'imcc/t/syn/file.t' fail too.
# --- imcc/t/syn/file.t ---
imcc/t/syn/file.# Failed test (imcc/t/syn/file.t at line 388)
# got: 'error:imcc:No such file or directory
# in file 'temp.imc' line 2
# '
# expected: 'error:imcc:No such fi
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 18:33:00 +0100, Michal Jurosz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Failed TestStatus Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed
>
> imcc/t/imcpasm/opt1.t 1 256491 2.04% 48
> t/dy
Terrence Brannon wrote:
I gave a talk on Perl 6 Junctions at the Thousand Oaks Perl Mongers
meeting last night
http://www.hcoop.net/~terry/perl/talks/p6-junctions/index.html
and two questions/desires came out of it:
1: will it be possible to know which element of a junction is
currently
David Storrs wrote:
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 03:38:52PM -0600, Rod Adams wrote:
There lingers the case of:
use Foo; # from above, exports &bar is MMD::Random
multi sub bar {...}
Does this generate an error, since one could expect this particular &bar
to be Manhattan? Or does it assume Ran
> If script startup and module loading really is the culprit you could try the
> mod_perl approach.
>
> Load all required modules and then for each script, fork a new perl process
> which uses do "testxxx.t" to run each script.
That's a good idea - thanks!
I gave it a try and these are the times
Given:
class Foo {
method Bar () {...};
}
sub Bar (Any $x) {...};
my Foo $f;
Bar $f;
Is that last line the same as:
&Bar.($f);
or
$f.Bar;
Does it matter if we change C< sub Bar > to C< multi sub Bar >?
Is there some form of implicit multi sub that gets created to make C<
> Some of these same tests are failing on debian, fedora, and freebsd
> (fresh checkouts). It looks like someone broke something.
Seems to have went all wrong between 20:35 and 21:35 on 9th(gmt).
With only the loosest understanding of stuff I think ( a little knowledge can
be a dangerous thing) i
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Rod Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It seems to me that there are several advantages to making a group of
multi with the same short name a single object, of type
MultiSub|MultiMethod, which internally holds references to the all the
various routines that share that short
On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 16:36 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Seems to have went all wrong between 20:35 and 21:35 on 9th(gmt).
> With only the loosest understanding of stuff I think ( a little
> knowledge can be a dangerous thing) it may be related to
>
> pmc.c
>
> revision 1.95
> date: 2005/0
Rod Adams wrote:
I do not believe that is possible.
This is the "filtering" or "unification" behavior that people keep
wanting junctions to have, which they do not.
Aww! But what about all the great problems that could be expressed
with them? I know of two languages that consider this to be a co
Rod Adams wrote:
I do not believe that you can create a 'lazy junction'. But I don't
recall the topic coming up before, so we'll have to wait for Damian to
come back unless someone else knows for certain.
My understanding is that all lists are conceptually lazy. "any(2..Inf)"
is perfectly valid.
Sam Vilain wrote:
Rod Adams wrote:
I do not believe that is possible.
This is the "filtering" or "unification" behavior that people keep
wanting junctions to have, which they do not.
Aww! But what about all the great problems that could be expressed
with them? I know of two languages that consi
Strangely all the tests ( well pyclass pycomplex and pyfunc so far )
pass on freebsd but do so
very very slowly and parrot is eating memory like there is no
tomorrow. Gets above 300meg during
each of the tests. Not sure if this is new as its a long time since I
tried parrot on freebsd.
-O
Dave Whipp wrote:
Rod Adams wrote:
I do not believe that you can create a 'lazy junction'. But I don't
recall the topic coming up before, so we'll have to wait for Damian
to come back unless someone else knows for certain.
My understanding is that all lists are conceptually lazy.
"any(2..Inf)"
> "RA" == Rod Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> My understanding is that all lists are conceptually
>> lazy. "any(2..Inf)" is perfectly valid.
>>
>>
RA> The list being fed into the junction can be lazy. But I believe that
RA> the list gets iterated over completely in the
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 02:22:20PM -0600, Rod Adams wrote:
> David Storrs wrote:
> >On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 03:38:52PM -0600, Rod Adams wrote:
> >> use Foo; # from above, exports &bar is MMD::Random
> >> multi sub bar {...}
> >>
> >>Does this generate an error, since one could expect this particu
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 03:27:23PM -0600, Rod Adams wrote:
> Given:
>
>class Foo {
> method Bar () {...};
>}
>
>sub Bar (Any $x) {...};
>my Foo $f;
>
>Bar $f;
>
>
> Is that last line the same as:
>&Bar.($f);
> or
>$f.Bar;
I don't see how it can be anything bu
From: Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 10:53:11 +0100
Rod Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It seems to me that there are several advantages to making a group of
> multi with the same short name a single object, of type
> MultiSub|MultiMethod, which int
David Storrs wrote:
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 02:22:20PM -0600, Rod Adams wrote:
David Storrs wrote:
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 03:38:52PM -0600, Rod Adams wrote:
use Foo; # from above, exports &bar is MMD::Random
multi sub bar {...}
Does this generate an error, since one could expect thi
Rod Adams writes:
> Dave Whipp wrote:
>
> >Rod Adams wrote:
> >
> >>I do not believe that you can create a 'lazy junction'. But I don't
> >>recall the topic coming up before, so we'll have to wait for Damian
> >>to come back unless someone else knows for certain.
> >
> >
> >My understanding is t
Anyone seen this message with Readonly running under Devel::Cover:
Invalid tie at (eval
22)[/usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.0/Readonly.pm:338] line 9
It's a little spooky... my tests used to be fine, but then I made a
couple innocuous changes in one test file (changing log levels) and I
star
Matt Diephouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Some of these same tests are failing on debian, fedora, and freebsd
> (fresh checkouts). It looks like someone broke something.
Release or current CVS?
leo
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 22:23:07 +0100, Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matt Diephouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Some of these same tests are failing on debian, fedora, and freebsd
> > (fresh checkouts). It looks like someone broke something.
>
> Release or current CVS?
Current C
Rod Adams wrote:
And as one who recently proposed a way of getting Prolog like features
in Perl (through Rules, not Junctions), I understand the appeal
completely. Junctions are not the way to that goal. They are something
different.
> Taking multiple values at once is what junctions are all abo
43 matches
Mail list logo
