On Oct 31, 2005, at 7:49, John Lenz wrote:
On Fri, October 28, 2005 2:22 pm, Nick Glencross said:
Guys,
As mentioned on the list yesterday I started evaluating ffcall as a
way
of providing NCI functionality.
http://www.haible.de/bruno/packages-ffcall.html
I am a SWIG (www.swig.org) dev
> [bernhard - So 30. Okt 2005, 04:35:45]:
>
> Hi,
>
> it looks like recent PGE changes broke 'Parrot m4'.
> I have boiled it down to a 20 line test cast and added it
> as test 4 in t/library/pge.t. This test case fails, at least under my
> Linux installation, with a segmentation fault.
>
> My
Nick Glencross wrote:
>
> As mentioned on the list yesterday I started evaluating ffcall
> as a way of providing NCI functionality.
>
> http://www.haible.de/bruno/packages-ffcall.html
>
> I actually really like the current NCI implementation, although
> it suffers from a large nci.c file and all
In the last year as a Fink maintainer (Mac OS X debian-like package
manager), I've come across a couple CPAN modules that have no license
information at all. It's very frustrating. I've submitted RT bugs,
but one of them has been fixed (thanks Ken Williams).
To encourage authors to correc
Hi!
On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 08:34:09AM -0600, Chris Dolan wrote:
> To encourage authors to correct this oversight, I propose a new pair
> of Kwalitee tests. Both would be nice, but if either of them were
> implemented, I'd be thrilled. I'd prefer that someone else implement
> the test (l
Bernhard Schmalhofer via RT wrote:
it looks like recent PGE changes broke 'Parrot m4'.
I have boiled it down to a 20 line test cast and added it
as test 4 in t/library/pge.t. This test case fails, at least under my
Linux installation, with a segmentation fault.
It looks like a GC bug, kind o
Garrett Goebel wrote:
Nick Glencross wrote:
As mentioned on the list yesterday I started evaluating ffcall
as a way of providing NCI functionality.
http://www.haible.de/bruno/packages-ffcall.html
I actually really like the current NCI implementation, although
it suffers from a large nci.c
Getting the following error on 'nmake realclean', a popup (why on
earth can't I cut and paste this error!#$#) with:
perl.exe: Application error:
The instruction at "0x7c93426d" referenced memory at "0x".
The memory could not be "read".
Click on "OK". Get a second popup:
perl.exe -
On Mon, 2005-10-31 at 20:12 +, Nick Glencross wrote:
> I certainly agree about what was being said about supporting multiple
> backends as it protects us against future nasty platforms. However, I'm
> unclear what the benefits of the favoured option of using JIT code was;
> that sounds like
