Re: @array = $scalar

On 8/31/05, Ingo Blechschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > @array = $scalar;# really means > @array = ($scalar,); # same as If list construction is via the &infix:<,> operator, does that mean a blasphemous sinner could create &infix:<,=> as a sy

Re: Call for B0rked

On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 07:37:01PM -0400, Will Coleda wrote: > > However, I vote for the following, which are more specific: > > Unfinished Opcodes: > > https://rt.perl.org/rt3//Ticket/Display.html?id=32544 (split) [should > be doable if we s/regexp/perl 6 rule/ and use PGE.] In recent discus

Re: Operator sub names are not special

On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 13:43:57 -0600, Luke Palmer wrote: > Uh yeah, I think that's what I was saying. To clarify: > > sub foo (&prefix:<+>) { 1 == 2 }# 1 and 2 in numeric context > foo(&say); # nothing printed > > But: > > sub foo (&prefix:<+>) { +1 == +2 } > foo(&say);

Re: @array = $scalar

On 01/09/05, Ashley Winters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If list construction is via the &infix:<,> operator, does that mean a > blasphemous sinner could create &infix:<,=> as a synonym for push? If the self-assignment metaoperator works the way I think it does[1], then you shouldn't even need to

Re: @array = $scalar

Ashley Winters skribis 2005-09-01 0:58 (-0700): > If list construction is via the &infix:<,> operator, does that mean a > blasphemous sinner could create &infix:<,=> as a synonym for push? You could do that even without , being a list constructor. However, in general, chained operators like comm

Re: @array = $scalar

Stuart Cook skribis 2005-09-01 22:49 (+1000): > [1] i.e. magically applies itself to any valid infix operator, just > like »« and [] do , is not a normal binary infix operator. It's not even binary, although it can of course be used with only two operands. Juerd -- http://convolution.nl/maak_ju

Re: GMC release

After svn up, realclean, configure; make: ~/research/gmc wcoleda$ make parrot Invoking Parrot to generate runtime/parrot/include/config.fpmc -- cross your fingers ./miniparrot config_lib.pasm > runtime/parrot/include/config.fpmc make: *** [runtime/parrot/include/config.fpmc] Error 138 Running

TypeCheck 1.0

I have released TypeCheck 1.0: The uploaded file Devel-TypeCheck-1.0.tar.gz has entered CPAN as file: $CPAN/authors/id/B/BA/BARGLE/Devel-TypeCheck-1.0.tar.gz size: 34411 bytes md5: 0de38ecd71d35205b17a22c8d3666fc8 Features of this version: -Aggregate data types (hashes and arrays

Re: GMC release

On Thu, 1 Sep 2005, Nattfodd wrote: > today is the deadline for the google summer of code projects, and it's time > anyway for a "release" of GMC. > GMC is a generational garbage collector for parrot that allows copying of > objects and thus copying GC schemes. Thanks for submitting this. I also

Re: Operator sub names are not special

On 9/1/05, Yuval Kogman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 13:43:57 -0600, Luke Palmer wrote: > > Uh yeah, I think that's what I was saying. To clarify: > > > > sub foo (&prefix:<+>) { 1 == 2 }# 1 and 2 in numeric context > > foo(&say); # nothing printed > > > > But

Re: GMC release

Andy Dougherty wrote: On Thu, 1 Sep 2005, Nattfodd wrote: today is the deadline for the google summer of code projects, and it's time anyway for a "release" of GMC. GMC is a generational garbage collector for parrot that allows copying of objects and thus copying GC schemes. Thanks f

for $arrayref {...}

Hi, my $arrayref = ; for @$arrayref {...};# loop body executed three times, of course for ($arrayref,) {...}; # loop body executed only one time for ($arrayref) {...}; # loop body executed one or three times? for $arrayref {...}; # loop body executed one or three t

Re: GMC release

On Thu, 1 Sep 2005, Nattfodd wrote: > Andy Dougherty wrote: > > > On Thu, 1 Sep 2005, Nattfodd wrote: > > > > > > > today is the deadline for the google summer of code projects, and it's > > > time > > > anyway for a "release" of GMC. > > > GMC is a generational garbage collector for parrot th

Re: for $arrayref {...}

Ingo Blechschmidt skribis 2005-09-01 20:29 (+0200): > for ($arrayref,) {...}; # loop body executed only one time Yes: scalar in list context. > for ($arrayref) {...}; # loop body executed one or three times? Same thing: scalar in list context. So once. > for $arrayref {...};

[perl #37049] [PATCH] Use ExtUtils::Commands more consistently

# New Ticket Created by Bernhard Schmalhofer # Please include the string: [perl #37049] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=37049 > Hi, ExtUtils::Command provides Unix commands on several platforms. So it make

Re: no 6;

On 9/1/05, Rafael Garcia-Suarez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I just commited into bleadperl a patch that implements this : > > $ ./perl -e 'no 5' > Perls since v5.0.0 too modern--this is v5.9.3, stopped at -e line 1. > BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at -e line 1. > > That is, the e

no 6;

I just commited into bleadperl a patch that implements this : $ ./perl -e 'no 5' Perls since v5.0.0 too modern--this is v5.9.3, stopped at -e line 1. BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at -e line 1. That is, the exact opposite of the current "use VERSION" syntax. One of the uses I had

Re: Call for B0rked

On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 04:04:45PM -0700, chromatic wrote: > Hi all, > > In a recent discussion with Chip and Leo, the idea came up to ask for a > list of very specific TODO items -- specifically things that should work > but don't. Not very specific, but: "whatever Ponie needs most". I'm sure

Re: for $arrayref {...}

On 9/1/05, Juerd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ingo Blechschmidt skribis 2005-09-01 20:29 (+0200): > > for ($arrayref,) {...}; # loop body executed only one time > > Yes: scalar in list context. > > > for ($arrayref) {...}; # loop body executed one or three times? > > Same thing: scala

[RELEASE] WWW::Kontent 0.02: Release and revelations

= WWW::Kontent 0.02 I am happy to announce the release of WWW::Kontent 0.02: File: $CPAN/authors/id/B/BR/BRENTDAX/WWW-Kontent-0.02.tar.gz Size: 62121 bytes MD5: 513018f0f2f8a0533a79d0b642323f2b Please note that it may take so

Optimizer Documentation

As part of my Summer of Code project, I wanted to improve the documentation of the optimizer. This was especially relevant for me since I had to learn it my self by trial and error and asking questions. So here is my first draft of the optimizer documentation. I tried to include the most import

Re: Optimizer Documentation

> Also, this is in plain text format. What is the standard way to > convert a document to POD format? By rewriting it. Only took me a few minutes: =head1 NANE optimizer.pod - About the IMCC optimizer =head1 ABSTRACT This document describes how the IMCC optimizer works. =head1 DESCRIPTION T

Re: GMC release

Andy Dougherty wrote: Overall, I wonder if it's an alignment issue, since SPARC tends to be much more sensitve to that than x86. I haven't looked deeply at the code at all, but do you do anything special to ensure that the blocks of memory you are moving around maintain their aligment?

Re: GMC release

On 9/2/05, Nattfodd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > ...but it should be fine as > long as you define GMC_GC_RUN (at least to see if it can run correctly > miniparrot)... err, it was GMC_NO_GC_RUN, of course. Now I'll really use some sleep :)

Re: GMC release

Much better on OS X now! parrot: Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed --- t/dynclass/pyclass.t1 256 61 16.67% 6 t/dynclass/pyfunc.t 1 256 41 25.