I submitted a smoke test, but I think the graphics doesn't show enough
information, so, here is the output of make smoke, on Darwin, Tiger.
perl t/harness --html
# Failed test (t/pmc/nci.t at line 35)
# got: 'parrot(23511,0xa000ef98) malloc: *** Deallocation of a
pointer not mall
# New Ticket Created by Roger Browne
# Please include the string: [perl #37386]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=37386 >
In file include/parrot/cclass.h, the values of enum_cclass_any and
enum_cclass_none app
Michael G Schwern wrote:
I don't have a long term solution for users of test_diag(). I'm entertaining
ideas. "Don't change the failure output" is not one of them. One temporary
hack is to parse the test_diag() input, look for attempts to match the old
Test::More diagnostics and translate it in
# New Ticket Created by Will Coleda
# Please include the string: [perl #37388]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=37388 >
From Configure.pl :
=item C<--expnetwork>
Enable experimental networking. This is an
Joshua Hoblitt via RT wrote:
[leo - Mon Jun 13 00:47:57 2005]:
perldoc -ud packfile-c.pod ../src/packfile.c
Unknow option -d
Leo,
What's the purpose of this bug?
Well, obviously does my perldoc, which seems to be from 5.8.0, not
understand the -d option.
-J
leo
> --- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ---
> Von: Will Coleda (via RT) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> An: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Betreff: [perl #37388] [TODO] remove -expnetwork from Config
> From Configure.pl :
>
> =item C<--expnetwork>
>
> Enable experimental networking. This is an unused option and should
> prob
On Sat, Oct 08, 2005 at 14:44:48 +0100, Alberto Simes wrote:
> I submitted a smoke test, but I think the graphics doesn't show enough
> information, so, here is the output of make smoke, on Darwin, Tiger.
Odd, I wonder why diagnosis are emitted on STDERR (or something else
maybe).
If they would
Eliza is now working again (at least partially. btw: the debug output
below is part of sample/eliza2.bas)
$ perl compile.pl samples/eliza2.bas && ../../../parrot TARG_test.imc
Please wait, initializing...(This will take a minute)
I am Eliza, the Computer Psychiatrist
Why have you requested thi
Last status of this error:
> --
> $ perl compile.pl test.bas Use of uninitialized value in concatenation
> (.) or string at compile.pl line 22, line 10.
> At BASIC source line :
> at source line 0 at COMP_toker.pm line 208,
> line 10.
This now counts up to 100 and complains at the end
On Sat, Oct 08, 2005 at 06:26:46PM +0100, Nik Clayton wrote:
> Define a new version of TAP with a single change.
>
> Specifically, emit a version number in the TAP output that describes the
> version of TAP that's being emitted.
While this may be an interesting idea, its irrelevant to the TBT pr
On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 11:34:50AM -0500, Steve Peters wrote:
> I've just added this to bleadperl.
With or without Test::Builder::Tester?
--
Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pobox.com/~schwern
Insulting our readers is part of our business model.
http://somethingpos
Hi,
while fixing bugs for the imminent Pugs 6.2.10 release, we ran into
several issues with magical pairs (pairs which unexpectedly participate
in named binding) again. Based on Luke's "Demagicalizing pairs" thread
[1], #perl6 refined the exact semantics [2].
The proposed changes are:
* "(key =>
> "IB" == Ingo Blechschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
IB> * "(key => $value)" (with the parens) is always a positionally passed
IB> Pair object. "key => $value" (without the parens) is a named
IB> parameter:
IB> sub foo ($a) {...}
IB> * Unary "*" makes a normal pair va
Hi,
Uri Guttman wrote:
>> "IB" == Ingo Blechschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> IB> * "(key => $value)" (with the parens) is always a positionally
> passed
> IB> Pair object. "key => $value" (without the parens) is a named
> IB> parameter:
>
> IB> sub foo ($a) {...}
>
>
PS: As an example of something I'd like to see 'cleaned up' in TAP --
I have a lifelong aversion to 'syntactic comments', i.e., comments
that actually have a meaning to something parsing them. Accordingly,
I'd love to see "not ok 2 # TODO bend space and time" become "todo 2 #
bend space and ti
On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 09:16:58PM -0700, Joshua Hoblitt via RT wrote:
> Guys,
>
> What is the status of this bug? Should this be a PGE todo item?
My opinion is that it's "not a bug" -- the normal behavior for
most programs with infinite recursive loops is that they
eventually explode. The orig
On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 20:22:59 +0200, Ingo Blechschmidt wrote:
> Opinions?
Yes!
--
() Yuval Kogman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 0xEBD27418 perl hacker &
/\ kung foo master: *shu*rik*en*sh*u*rik*en*s*hur*i*ke*n*: neeyah
pgp94r3gXdq9d.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 03:59:40AM -0700, Leopold Toetsch via RT wrote:
> Joshua Hoblitt via RT wrote:
> >>[leo - Mon Jun 13 00:47:57 2005]:
> >>
> >>perldoc -ud packfile-c.pod ../src/packfile.c
> >>Unknow option -d
>
> > Leo,
> >
> > What's the purpose of this bug?
>
> Well, obviously does my p
On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 12:41:18PM -0700, Patrick R. Michaud via RT wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 09:16:58PM -0700, Joshua Hoblitt via RT wrote:
> > Guys,
> >
> > What is the status of this bug? Should this be a PGE todo item?
>
> My opinion is that it's "not a bug" -- the normal behavior for
If I change the log file for the warnings, all the tests pass. We just
need to know if the malloc library is correct about these warnings.
Cheers
Alberto
Yuval Kogman wrote:
On Sat, Oct 08, 2005 at 14:44:48 +0100, Alberto Simes wrote:
I submitted a smoke test, but I think the graphics doesn't
On Sun, 2005-10-09 at 17:25 +0200, Yuval Kogman wrote:
> Odd, I wonder why diagnosis are emitted on STDERR (or something else
> maybe).
That's where Test::Builder emits them. Test::Harness never collected
them or parsed them until recently.
It's fairly difficult to decide whether a diagnostic i
On Sat, 2005-10-08 at 18:26 +0100, Nik Clayton wrote:
> PS: As an example of something I'd like to see 'cleaned up' in TAP -- I
> have a lifelong aversion to 'syntactic comments', i.e., comments that
> actually have a meaning to something parsing them. Accordingly, I'd
> love to see "not ok 2
On 10/9/05, Uri Guttman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "IB" == Ingo Blechschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> IB> sub foo ($a) {...}
>
> works for me. but what about lists and arrays?
>
> my @z = ( 'a', 1 ) ;
> foo( @z ) # $a = [ 'a', 1 ] ??
Yep.
> my @z
> "LP" == Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
LP> On 10/9/05, Uri Guttman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > "IB" == Ingo Blechschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
IB> sub foo ($a) {...}
>>
>> works for me. but what about lists and arrays?
>>
>> my @z = ( 'a', 1 ) ;
>> fo
On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 02:07:30PM -0700, chromatic wrote:
> > PS: As an example of something I'd like to see 'cleaned up' in TAP -- I
> > have a lifelong aversion to 'syntactic comments', i.e., comments that
> > actually have a meaning to something parsing them. Accordingly, I'd
> > love to se
On Sat, Oct 08, 2005 at 01:38:06AM -0700, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/src/Test-Simple-0.62.tar.gz
> or
> http://svn.schwern.org/svn/CPAN/Test-Simple/trunk
> or
> a CPAN near you.
>
I've just added this to bleadperl.
Thanks,
Steve Peters
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[cut from a off list thread between jhoblitt & nickg]
>As a general comment, 36119 makes me a little nervous as 'chmod' isn't
>something you can count on unless your on a POSIX like system and osname
>ne 'MSWin32' certainly would encompass non-POSIX systems. Are you
>planning on retool this patch
On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 11:12:59AM -0700, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 11:34:50AM -0500, Steve Peters wrote:
> > I've just added this to bleadperl.
>
> With or without Test::Builder::Tester?
>
So I don't continue the breakage, with Test::Builder::Tester. For the
longer ter
Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Sat, Oct 08, 2005 at 06:26:46PM +0100, Nik Clayton wrote:
Define a new version of TAP with a single change.
Specifically, emit a version number in the TAP output that describes the
version of TAP that's being emitted.
While this may be an interesting idea, its irr
The think I don't like about `foo( *$bar )` is that it's not clear
whether you're splatting a pair, or a hash, or an array, or a complete
argument-list object. This is probably fine for quick-'n'-dirty code,
but I'd like to encourage a more explicit style:
my %hash = (a=>'b', c=>'d');
foo( *%
On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 10:11:45PM +0100, Nik Clayton wrote:
> >There was no protocol change here because there never was a protocol.
> >Test::Builder::Tester parses comments! BAD! EVIL! WRONG!
>
> First, there's not a lot T::B::T can do in this situation. One of the
> things you want to test
The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that perl6 (by
default) shouldn't refuse to run programs because of a (perceived or
real) type error. It should, of course, emit a compile-type type
*warning*, which can be silenced or made fatal at the user's
discretion.
There are a few reasons b
On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 06:24:30PM -0700, chromatic wrote:
> Nothing uses it yet; it's just there to test against in whatever
> generates the file for embedders. Someone'll have to enable it
> manually with some Makefile magic.
Would you like to propose such magic, at least a model?
("It's only
Ingo Blechschmidt wrote:
>Hi,
>
>while fixing bugs for the imminent Pugs 6.2.10 release, we ran into
>several issues with magical pairs (pairs which unexpectedly participate
>in named binding) again. Based on Luke's "Demagicalizing pairs" thread
>[1], #perl6 refined the exact semantics [2].
>
>The
I don't care if they're called "Truman Capote", they're lines whose
contents
are to be ignored. The harness ignores them. They're comments.
They won't always be ignored. I want them returned in the
Test::Harness::Point object.
xoxo,
Andy
--
Andy Lester => [EMAIL PROTECTED] => www.petd
On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 07:55:02PM -0500, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 09:55:44AM -1000, Joshua Hoblitt wrote:
> > > > What is the status of this bug? Should this be a PGE todo item?
> > >
> > > My opinion is that it's "not a bug" -- the normal behavior for
> > > most progr
I am delighted to announce Pugs 6.2.10, released during a slashdotting
on geoffb's "Optimizing for Fun" column:
http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/09/1831219
The release tarball will be available from CPAN shortly:
http://pugscode.org/dist/Perl6-Pugs-6.2.10.tar.gz
On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 01:31:54PM -0700, Joshua Hoblitt via RT wrote:
> [cut from a off list thread between jhoblitt & nickg]
>
> >As a general comment, 36119 makes me a little nervous as 'chmod' isn't
> >something you can count on unless your on a POSIX like system and osname
> >ne 'MSWin32' cer
They won't always be ignored. I want them returned in the
Test::Harness::Point object.
*sigh* But you're not going to parse the contents.
Right.
--
Andy Lester => [EMAIL PROTECTED] => www.petdance.com => AIM:petdance
On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 08:02:19PM -0500, Andy Lester wrote:
> >I don't care if they're called "Truman Capote", they're lines whose
> >contents
> >are to be ignored. The harness ignores them. They're comments.
>
> They won't always be ignored. I want them returned in the
> Test::Harness::Po
On 10/10/05, Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What about whitespace?
>
> foo (a => 42); # Note space
>
> Is that the first case (subcall with named arg) or the second case (sub
> with positional pair)?
Sub with positional pair, since the parens aren't call-parens (because
of the spac
> "SC" == Stuart Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
SC> The think I don't like about `foo( *$bar )` is that it's not clear
SC> whether you're splatting a pair, or a hash, or an array, or a complete
SC> argument-list object. This is probably fine for quick-'n'-dirty code,
SC> but I'd lik
Joshua~
On 10/9/05, Joshua Hoblitt via RT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Mon Oct 03 12:49:55 2005]:
> >
> > I brought it up on the list first, and Dan was OK with it because
> > scons can output a series of commands (like a bat file or batch
> > script) to build from scratch (n
Stuart Cook wrote:
>On 10/10/05, Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>What about whitespace?
>>
>> foo (a => 42); # Note space
>>
>>Is that the first case (subcall with named arg) or the second case (sub
>>with positional pair)?
>>
>>
>
>Sub with positional pair, since the paren
(It seems you're confused about my position because I was sloppy
presenting it. My apologies; hopefully this will clear a few things
up.)
On 10/10/05, Uri Guttman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Stuart Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The think I don't like about `foo( *$bar )` is that it's no
45 matches
Mail list logo
