In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Joshua Hoblitt writes:
: Can you send the post the output of `prove -v t/op/trans.t`? I suspect
: that atan2() may be misbehaving on cygwin in the same way that it does
: on Solaris.
After upping to r10836, I needed the following patch to build:
Index: src/cl
Hi
I could install parrot with the earlier one itself. Thanks for the help.
regards
Ravi Sastry
On 12/30/05, Joshua Hoblitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Does this issue still occur with recent svn sources?
>
> -J
>
> --
> On Wed, Dec 28, 2005 at 06:54:18AM -0800, jerry gay wrote:
> > On 12/28/05
I've commited a possible fix for openbsd, cygwin, & solaris as changesets
r10839 & r10843. I basically applied what Steve Peters proposed but
with the changes in math.c instead of creating init.c (as agreed to on
#parrot).
This doesn't appear to have done anything for gcc/solaris... can someone
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Joshua Hoblitt via RT" writes:
: I've commited a possible fix for openbsd, cygwin, & solaris as changesets
: r10839 & r10843. I basically applied what Steve Peters proposed but
: with the changes in math.c instead of creating init.c (as agreed to on
: #parro
Argh. Just realised my old address, [EMAIL PROTECTED], could receive emails
but not send them (not even to itself!)
>
> On Dec 31, 2005, at 15:43, Amos Robinson wrote:
>
--
>
> A copy_ins() function would be nice, if needed.
>
>> However, this doesn't seem to work with e.g. set_args.
>
> Why?
In
HaloO,
happy new year to Everybody!
Luke Palmer wrote:
Env variables are implicitly passed up through any number of call
frames.
Interesting to note that you imagine the call chain to grow upwards
where I would say 'implicitly passed down'. Nevertheless I would
also think of upwards beeing th
HaloO,
Larry Wall wrote:
I think that deep copying is rare enough in practice that it should
be dehuffmanized to .deepcopy, perhaps with optional arguments saying
how deep.
So perhaps .copy:deep then?
Simple shallow copy is .copy, whereas .clone is a .bless
variant that will copy based on
On Jan 2, 2006, at 16:53, Amos Robinson wrote:
error:imcc:The opcode '_' (<1>) was not found. Check the type and
number
of the
arguments
Looks strange. gdb might help.
Hmm, okay. I was hoping I could've just copied the set_args,
get_results,
and callmethodccs. I'll have a look further int
HaloO Eric,
you wrote:
#strictly outside
($a > 3..6) === (3 > $a > 6) === (3 > $a || $a > 6)
Just looking at that hurts my head, how can $a be smaller than three
and larger than 6? That doesn't make even a little since.
To my twisted brain it does ;)
The idea is that
outside === !i
On Mon, Jan 02, 2006 at 09:01:55AM -0600, Greg Bacon wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Joshua Hoblitt via RT" writes:
>
> : I've commited a possible fix for openbsd, cygwin, & solaris as changesets
> : r10839 & r10843. I basically applied what Steve Peters proposed but
> : with th
Today Stevan started writing out Roles for container
types,
so there can be multiple classes that implements the Hash/Array/Scalar
interface, so operations like .{} and .[] can apply to user-defined
types as well.
This is similar to the Perl 5 way of using the "tie"
interface, as well as over
# New Ticket Created by Alberto Simoes
# Please include the string: [perl #38131]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=38131 >
If we go in the way Perl5 is working, symlink fails (raise exception) in
cases where
I just went, after ages, and sync'd up with a current parrot for my
work project. Fixing things to work with the changes has been...
interesting.
The big hang up has been the removal of the T and L parameter types
for NCI calls. T was a string pointer array and L was a long array.
They're sti
HaloO,
Luke Palmer wrote:
In fact, it might even bug me more. I'm a proponent of the idea that
one name (in a particular scope) is one concept. We don't overload +
to mean "concatenation", we don't overload << to mean "output", and we
don't overload > to mean "outside".
I agree. And have con
Table of contents
1. Deep binding is not appropriate.
2. Outline of a shallow-binding solution.
3. Unbinding must work with a general stack-unwinding mechanism.
4. Conclusion (not).
1. Deep binding is not appropriate.
It has always been clear that a "save/modify/restore"
On Jan 2, 2006, at 19:36, Dan Sugalski wrote:
The big hang up has been the removal of the T and L parameter types
for NCI calls. T was a string pointer array and L was a long array.
[ ... ]
Are there alternatives? The documentation for this stuff is worse now
than when I wrote it originally
HaloO,
Austin Frank wrote:
It seems to me like these are related contexts-- arguments to a sub are
supposed to fulfill its parameter list. This makes the overloading of
prefix:<*> confusing to me.
Would an explicit type List help?
I'm pretty sure we don't need slurpiness in argument lists,
HaloO,
Luke Palmer wrote:
The point was that you should know when you're passing a named
argument, always. Objects that behave specially when passed to a
function prevent the ability to abstract uniformly using functions.[1]
...
[1] This is one of my quibbles with junctions, too.
You mean the
. . . depending on where Parrot is located. Mine is in
/usr/src/parrot, so the code expected /usr/xpto/parrot/src instead of
/usr/src/parrot/xpto . . .
-- Bob Rogers
http://rgrjr.dyndns.org/
---
On 1/2/06, TSa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But I have no idea for this nice syntax, yet. Perhaps something like
>
>my &junc = any(1,2,3);
>my $val = 1;
>
>if junc( &infix:<==>, $val ) {...}
>
> which is arguably clumsy.
I don't think anyone would waste his time arguing that. :-)
> T
On Mon, Jan 02, 2006 at 06:55:24PM -0500, Bob Rogers wrote:
: [2] About two-thirds of the way through A06 (search for "temporize
: object attributes"), Larry says that this will be done via
: closures. In order to support rezipping, such a closure would need
: to accept a new value
21 matches
Mail list logo
