On 7/4/05, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 03, 2005 at 01:53:45PM +0200, demerphq wrote:
> > Actually about the only thing that seems to be really "hard" is doing
> > comparison of blessed regexes with overloaded stringification. For
> > that you need XS if you want
Michael G Schwern wrote:
I'm going through some work to restore Test::More and Test::Harness to work
on 5.4.5, minor stuff really, and I'm wondering if its worth the trouble.
Has anyone seen 5.004_xx in the wild? And if so, were people actively
developing using it or was it just there to run so
On 7/4/05, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm going through some work to restore Test::More and Test::Harness to work
> on 5.4.5, minor stuff really, and I'm wondering if its worth the trouble.
>
> Has anyone seen 5.004_xx in the wild? And if so, were people actively
> developing
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 02:00:57PM +1000, Adam Kennedy wrote:
> Michael G Schwern wrote:
> > I'm going through some work to restore Test::More and Test::Harness to work
> > on 5.4.5, minor stuff really, and I'm wondering if its worth the trouble.
> >
> > Has anyone seen 5.004_xx in the wild? And
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 02:00:57PM +1000, Adam Kennedy wrote:
> I've seen it on occasion, and it's general on large old IRIX servers,
> and similar aged things. CVS repositories and other boxes that have
> provided the same services pretty much forever and have never had a
> compelling reason to
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 10:36:39AM +0100, Ben Evans wrote:
> I would say that this cascade effect is precisely why you *should*
> drop 5.004 compatability. There's no excuse other than "if it ain't broke,
> don't fix it" for running such an archaic Perl. People should be encouraged
> to move to a m
Is "make parrot_so" not ready? (Or is it not what I think it is, chiefly a way
to generate a libparrot.so?) Attempts to run 'make parrot_so' after a 'make
all world' seems to always result in :
nomad parrot-0.2.2 # make parrot_so
echo -oimcc/imclexer.c imcc/imcc.l
-oimcc/imclexer.c imcc/imcc.l
/
From: Michael G Schwern [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 10:36:39AM +0100, Ben Evans wrote:
> > I would say that this cascade effect is precisely why you *should*
> > drop 5.004 compatability. There's no excuse other than "if it ain't
> broke,
> > don't fix it" for running such
> I've just been through the should-I-shouldn't-I-support-5.4 with my
> (painfully slow) rewrite of Compress::Zlib. In the end I
...
I always thought that Compress::Zlib is just a wrapper around zlib which in
turn is C and developed elsewhere (and in stable state for a long time now).
What is "
Konovalov, Vadim wrote:
I've just been through the should-I-shouldn't-I-support-5.4 with my
(painfully slow) rewrite of Compress::Zlib. In the end I
...
I always thought that Compress::Zlib is just a wrapper around zlib which in
turn is C and developed elsewhere (and in stable state for a lo
Michael Cummings wrote:
Is "make parrot_so" not ready?
It was working some time ago and is ok again now (r8501).
Thanks for testing,
leo
HaloO Larry,
you wrote:
On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 09:25:10AM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
: Currently, does this:
:
: sub foo (::T $x, ::T $y) { }
:
: and this:
:
: sub foo (T $x, T $y) { }
:
: Means the same thing, namely
:
:a) if the package T is defined in scope, use that as the
Hi,
.assuming is non-mutating on Code objects:
my $subref = &some_sub;
my $assumed_subref = $subref.assuming(:foo);
$subref =:= &some_sub;# true, $subref did not change
Quoting S06:
> The result of a use statement is a (compile-time) object that also
> has an .assuming method,
Larry Wall wrote:
On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 12:37:22PM +0200, "TSa (Thomas Sandlaß)" wrote:
: BTW, is -> on the 'symbolic unary' precedence level
: as its read-only companion \ ?.
No, -> introduces a term that happens to consist of a formal signature
and a block. There are no ordinary expressions
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 03:00:14AM -0700, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 10:36:39AM +0100, Ben Evans wrote:
> > I would say that this cascade effect is precisely why you *should*
> > drop 5.004 compatability. There's no excuse other than "if it ain't broke,
> > don't fix it" fo
Ben Evans wrote:
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 02:00:57PM +1000, Adam Kennedy wrote:
Michael G Schwern wrote:
I'm going through some work to restore Test::More and Test::Harness to work
on 5.4.5, minor stuff really, and I'm wondering if its worth the trouble.
Has anyone seen 5.004_xx in the wild?
From: Konovalov, Vadim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > I've just been through the should-I-shouldn't-I-support-5.4 with my
> > (painfully slow) rewrite of Compress::Zlib. In the end I
>
> ...
>
> I always thought that Compress::Zlib is just a wrapper around zlib which
> in
> turn is C and develop
> > > What is "(painfully slow) rewrite"?
> >
> > I think Paul means that it is taking him a long time to
> write the code,
> > not that the code itself is slow.
>
> Correct. Looks like I answered the wrong question :-)
Indeed I understood incorrectly first time, but you shed quite many light o
From: David Landgren [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Konovalov, Vadim wrote:
> >>I've just been through the should-I-shouldn't-I-support-5.4 with my
> >>(painfully slow) rewrite of Compress::Zlib. In the end I
> >
> >
> > ...
> >
> > I always thought that Compress::Zlib is just a wrapper around zlib
From: Paul Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 03:00:14AM -0700, Michael G Schwern wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 10:36:39AM +0100, Ben Evans wrote:
> > > I would say that this cascade effect is precisely why you *should*
> > > drop 5.004 compatability. There's no
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 04:09:59PM +0200, "TSa (Thomas Sandlaß)" wrote:
: I think the point is that using a type variable in the signature of a sub
: is too subtle for recognizing it as a type function that produces typed
: subs. Thus---even if it resembles C++ templates---I suggest to put the
: ty
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 05:33:37PM +0200, Ingo Blechschmidt wrote:
: Hi,
:
: .assuming is non-mutating on Code objects:
:
: my $subref = &some_sub;
: my $assumed_subref = $subref.assuming(:foo);
: $subref =:= &some_sub;# true, $subref did not change
I think .assuming implies a
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 07:01:00PM +0200, "TSa (Thomas Sandlaß)" wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: >On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 12:37:22PM +0200, "TSa (Thomas Sandlaß)" wrote:
: >: BTW, is -> on the 'symbolic unary' precedence level
: >: as its read-only companion \ ?.
: >
: >No, -> introduces a term that h
Paul Johnson wrote:
As someone whose production code is currently required to run under
5.5.3, I'm very grateful to module authors whose code still runs under
that version at least. A number of modules which don't run under 5.5.3
do with simple changes, primarily changing "our" to "use vars" a
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 03:59:23PM -0400, James E Keenan wrote:
> I've only developed in 5.6+ environments. Can anyone provide a link to
> what I would have to do to make my modules compatible with 5.4 and/or 5.5?
Step one: Install 5.4.5 and 5.5.4.
Step two: Try out your module with them.
St
Michael G Schwern wrote:
That said, here's the main differences:
Thanks. My modules are sufficiently non-evil that I should be able to
compensate for these differences.
jimk
On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 01:24:38AM +0100, Fergal Daly wrote:
> There's an easy way to see what's "accptable" and what's not and what
> exactly this level equality means. Consider the following code
> template:
>
> ###
> # lots of stuff doing anything you like including
> # setting global varia
Richard Nuttall wrote:
- support for automatically pulling database DSN information from a
~/.dbi (or similar) file. This is constantly re-invented poorly.
Let's just do a connect by logical application name and let the
SysAdmins sort out which DB that connects to, in a standard
- support for automatically pulling database DSN information from a
~/.dbi (or similar) file. This is constantly re-invented poorly.
Let's just do a connect by logical application name and let the
SysAdmins sort out which DB that connects to, in a standard way.
This reminds me o
What is the plan for integrating code blocks into PGE? Will Coleda
mentioned on IRC that this issue came up at YAPC, but didn't seem to
indicate that there was any plan. As we transition to using PGE for
Tcl parsing, it'd be nice to have code blocks.
Specifically, it'd be nice to be able to specif
Tim et al,
Following are some ideas I have for the new DBI, that were thought
about greatly as I was both working on Rosetta/SQL::Routine and
writing Perl 6 under Pugs. These are all language-independent and
should be implemented at the Parrot-DBI level for all Parrot-hosted
languages to tak
Richard Nuttall wrote:
- support for automatically pulling database DSN information from a
~/.dbi (or similar) file. This is constantly re-invented poorly.
Let's just do a connect by logical application name and let the
SysAdmins sort out which DB that connects to, in a standard wa
Paul Marquess wrote:
Whilst I'm here, when I do get around to posting a beta on CPAN, I'd
prefer
it doesn't get used in anger until it has bedded-in. If I give the
module a
version number like 2.000_00, will the CPAN shell ignore it?
Indeed, if a distribution is numbered with such a number,
> On Mon, 4 Jul 2005 14:19:16 +0100, "Paul Marquess" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
> If I give the module a version number like 2.000_00, will the CPAN
> shell ignore it?
Yes. To be precice, the indexer on PAUSE will ignore it. But don't
forget to write it with quotes around.
--
andr
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 02:19:16PM +0100, Paul Marquess wrote:
> Whilst I'm here, when I do get around to posting a beta on CPAN, I'd prefer
> it doesn't get used in anger until it has bedded-in. If I give the module a
> version number like 2.000_00, will the CPAN shell ignore it?
This is often do
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 05:40:20PM -0400, James E Keenan wrote:
> Michael G Schwern wrote:
>
> >
> >That said, here's the main differences:
> >
I'm about a year out from seeing a Perl 4 in the wild, so, I'll assume
that early Perl 5's can be found if you look long enough.
Steve Peters
[EMAIL PRO
Darren Duncan wrote:
3. Redefine prepare() and execute() such that the first is expressly for
activities that can be done apart from a database (and hence can also be
done for a connection handle that is closed at the time) while all
activities that require database interaction are deferred to
Okay, considering that using the same name prepare() like this may
confuse some people, here is a refined solution that uses 3 methods
instead; please disregard any contrary statements that I previously
made:
# Opt 1: A user that wants the most control can do this (new feature):
my $sth1
Darren Duncan wrote:
Okay, considering that using the same name prepare() like this may
confuse some people, here is a refined solution that uses 3 methods
instead; please disregard any contrary statements that I previously made:
I think I'm beginning to like it.
Allow me to suggest one or tw
I seem to have come across a bug in the compute_dominators() algorithm
with the following PIR:
.sub _main
L1:
eq I0, 0, L3
L2:
goto L5
L3:
L4:
L5:
goto L7
L6:
inc I0
L7:
le I0, 0, L6
end
.end
Running with:
$ ./parrot/parrot -d 32 testbug.pir
I get "7 <- 0 1 2 5 7" for the dom
40 matches
Mail list logo
