I'd like to have a crack at rephrasing this, since everyone but
stevan seems to be getting the wrong impression.
Perl 6 has some hard to answer questions. The questions the
community has answered so far are:
* How the VM will work/look
* What the syntax/feature requirements are
I
Yuval Kogman wrote:
> What I do think is that there is something in the middle of these
> two big questions, and they are:
>
> * How will the Perl 6 compiler be designed (parts, etc)
That... was what Pugs Apocrypha was meant to contain, with PA02 being a
design overview, and PA03 onward doc
Parrot runs the ackermann benchmark faster than C.
leo
Heureka - from the -Ofun department
Or - running the ackermann function (and possibly other recursive
functions) really fast.
$ time ./parrot -Oc -C ack.pir 11
Ack(3, 11) = 16381
real0m0.567s
user0m0.559s
sys 0m0.008s
$ time ./
I guess this is one place where being CISC really is better than being
RISC. But how much improvement with outputting to a pbc first? But a
couple notes, there's no --help-optimize like --help-debug, and as far
as I know, there's no way to disable optimizations completely, e.g.
this pir
.su
"Joshua Isom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I guess this is one place where being CISC really is better than being
RISC. But how much improvement with outputting to a pbc first? But a
couple notes, there's no --help-optimize like --help-debug, and as far as I
know, there's no way to disable optim
This failure is actually a bus error. You can generate it with:'
../../parrot tcl.pbc -e 'proc a {} {global q;puts $q};a'
Here's the gdb backtrace:
Program received signal EXC_BAD_ACCESS, Could not access memory.
Reason: KERN_PROTECTION_FAILURE at address: 0x01b4
0x0106fc60 in Parrot_dec_p (
# New Ticket Created by Will Coleda
# Please include the string: [perl #38467]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=38467 >
Right now the Parrot::Test module is explicitly doing a check for a /
dev/null and chan
# New Ticket Created by jerry gay
# Please include the string: [perl #38468]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=38468 >
copyright info in the parrot repository has not been maintained. this
should be remedied.
Joshua Isom wrote:
I guess this is one place where being CISC really is better than being
RISC.
It really depends on the hardare you are running. E.g.
add I0, I1, 20
translates either to something like:
lea %ecx, 20(%edx) # not yet but in case ..
or
ori r11, r31, 20# r31 is 0
"Jonathan Worthington" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Better names and/or solutions welcome.
Chip has blessed this feature with a name - ":unique_reg" - and I've just
checked in the same stuff as before, but with the accepted name in place of
:non_volatile.
Jonathan
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
ori r11, r31, 20# r31 is 0
add r3, r4, r11# a 2nd oris is needed for constants > 0x
Well that's actually a bad example as there exists addi and addis
instructions.
But have a look at src/jit/arm/jit_emit.h emit_load_constant() and
follow the functio
Hi,
I recently fell in love with Test::Base and I decided to use
it at $work. Since the 'run filter, compare output' mode
of T::B did not fit my needs, I wrote a small wrapper
(Test::XXX for now...) that
enables to check/establish preconditions, run one or
more actions and check postconditions, f
Stevan~
On 2/7/06, Stevan Little <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > After all Foo is just a specific instance of the class Class.
>
> Shhh... class objects don't exist ... I was never here,... I will I
> count to three and when I snap my fingers you will awaken and will
> have forgotten all about cl
On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 06:38:14PM +, Robin Houston wrote:
: Late last year I implemented a few Perl 6 features in Perl 5.
: A couple of things have emerged that may be relevant to the
: Perl 6 design. Certainly they're things that I'm curious about.
: I'll send the other one in a separate mess
On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 07:32:18PM -0500, Stevan Little wrote:
: On 2/7/06, Matt Fowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: > Stevan~
: >
: > I am going to assume that you intended to reply to perl 6 language,
: > and thus will include your post in its entirety in my response.
:
: Yes, sorry... I missed
IMHO, people who set $/ are, by definition, saying that they expect
lines to terminate with something other than a newline; they should
expect 'say' to conform to their wishes. I don't like the notion of
perl second-guessing the programmer's intentions here; "Do what I
mean, not what I say" only c
On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 08:38:32AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> The question basically boils down to how you think about "say".
> Damian's argument is that, if people are like him, they will learn
> it as "print plus newline" rather than as "emit a whole record".
> I'm inclined to think that people d
while debugging partcl, leo asked will for some source comments to
understand where the generated code came from. i thought it should be
possible to walk the chain from the code emitter, and print the
calling sub's filename and line number in PIR.
walking the call chain is possible using a ParrotI
"jerry gay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
while debugging partcl, leo asked will for some source comments to
understand where the generated code came from. i thought it should be
possible to walk the chain from the code emitter, and print the
calling sub's filename and line number in PIR.
walking t
One more data point?
I might want a newline or I might want an ORS. The former, say()
gives me. The latter, print() provides.
I cannot imagine ever wanting a mixture of those, and if I ever do,
I expect I'll prefer to say what I mean:
# modulo syntax:
{ temp ORS //= "\n"; print @args
hi all :)
there's a feature split I'm itching for in Test::Builder, etc - the
ability to call is() and have it emit TAP free from the confines of
plan(). not that I don't want to call plan() (or no_plan) but I want to
do that in a completely separate perl interpreter. for example, I want
to do s
I'm still having troubles, when thinking about namespace PMCs and
implementation thereof.
Especially the relationship of class namespaces and the store_global
opcode.
We have e.g. this PIR snippets:
.sub main :main
cl = newclass 'Foo' # a class isa/hasa namespace ?!
...
.end
On Feb 8, 2006, at 11:41, Geoffrey Young wrote:
so, I guess my question is whether the plan->is linkage can be
broken in
Test::Builder/Test::Harness/wherever and still keep the bookkeeping in
tact so that the library behaves the same way for the bulk case. or
maybe at least provide some optio
On 2/8/06, Larry Wall wrote:
> From: Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I've now been using C (via Perl6::Say) for some time -- testing our
collective intuition on this -- and it turns out that b. isn't the least
surprising. At least, not to me. In fact, I am regularly (and annoyingly)
>
Larry Wall skribis 2006-02-08 8:38 (-0800):
> It would be nice to have other data points
I associate "say" with to-human communication, and there, I don't
generally have records. Without records, no ORS.
However, while I think that &say should not be
&print.assuming(:ors("\n")), it shouldn't be
On Tuesday 07 February 2006 23:55, Yuval Kogman wrote:
> Does this imply that we should think up this process?
Go ahead.
> If I propose a concrete plan for the implementation of Perl 6 in a
> layered fashion it will probably be even more overlooked.
>
> I have no authority, and this is not somet
>> so, thoughts or ideas? am I making any sense?
>
>
> Yes, you are.
*whew*
:)
> I think that the subprocess can load Test::More and
> friends like this:
>
> use Test::More no_plan => 1;
> Test::More->builder->no_header(1);
cool, thanks.
>
> That will set No_Plan, Have_Plan, and No_Hea
# New Ticket Created by Leopold Toetsch
# Please include the string: [perl #38469]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=38469 >
Something's wrong with it:
$ ./parrot -Oc ack.pir 3
Ack(3, 3) = 61
$ /parrot -Oc
But with jit enabled on x86/freebsd/openbsd, I was having problems with
some of the pow functions. The rt number is #38382. Because of the
compile time optimization, it made it trickier to work with because the
compile time was ok, but the jit runtime wasn't, and it took me a
little while to
On Feb 8, 2006, at 22:28, Joshua Isom wrote:
but an option to disable compile time optimizations would help with
the testing the interpreter instead of the compiler
It's not an optimization and it can't be turned off, as there are no
such opcodes like 'pow_i_ic_ic'. And again - the evaluatio
Geoffrey Young wrote:
hi all :)
there's a feature split I'm itching for in Test::Builder, etc - the
ability to call is() and have it emit TAP free from the confines of
plan(). not that I don't want to call plan() (or no_plan) but I want to
do that in a completely separate perl interpreter. for
On 2/7/06, Robin Houston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Any undef undefinedmatch if !defined $a
> Any Regex pattern matchmatch if $a =~ /$b/
> Code() Code()results are equalmatch if $a->() eq $b->()
> Any Code()simple cl
Luke wrote:
> My interpretation (which may be totally off, as I don't have any
> confirmation that anybody else is thinking the same way I am) is that
> the synopsis is wrong, and commutivity of ~~ is a happy coincidence
> wherever it exists. The way I've been thinking about ~~ is just as
> the f
Adam Kennedy wrote:
Geoffrey Young wrote:
hi all :)
there's a feature split I'm itching for in Test::Builder, etc - the
ability to call is() and have it emit TAP free from the confines of
plan(). not that I don't want to call plan() (or no_plan) but I want to
do that in a completely separate p
On Feb 8, 2006, at 12:41, Geoffrey Young wrote:
with your suggestion I'm almost there:
1..1
ok 1 - this was a passing test
# No tests run!
What parts do you want left out?
Best,
David
This works:
---test.pl---
use Test::More tests => 1;
my $Test = Test::More->builder;
my $counter = $Test->current_test;
print qx!perl t/response.pl!;
$Test->current_test($counter + 1);
But why 1? Why not 5? or 10?
__END__
---response.pl---
use Test::More no_plan => 1;
Test::More->bui
Adam Kennedy wrote:
This works:
---test.pl---
use Test::More tests => 1;
my $Test = Test::More->builder;
my $counter = $Test->current_test;
print qx!perl t/response.pl!;
$Test->current_test($counter + 1);
But why 1? Why not 5? or 10?
It has to be set to the number of tests run in the o
Consider "my Dog $spot". From the Perl6-to-English Dictionary:
Dog: a dog.
$spot: the dog that is named Spot.
^Dog: the concept of a dog.
Am I understanding things correctly?
If so, here's what I'd expect: a dog can bark, or Spot can bark; but
the concept of a dog cannot bark:
can Dog "b
-- Original message --
From: Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On 2/7/06, Robin Houston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Any undef undefinedmatch if !defined $a
> > Any Regex pattern matchmatch if $a =~ /$b/
> >
At 21:30 +0100 2/8/06, Juerd wrote:
>Larry Wall skribis 2006-02-08 8:38 (-0800):
> > It would be nice to have other data points
In the Macintosh world:
1) say is a reserved word in AppleScript that sends text to a speaker (with
windings and a cone).
2) We are forever mucking with $/ and $\ se
On 2/8/06, Jonathan Lang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Consider "my Dog $spot". From the Perl6-to-English Dictionary:
> Dog: a dog.
> $spot: the dog that is named Spot.
> ^Dog: the concept of a dog.
>
> Am I understanding things correctly?
>
> If so, here's what I'd expect: a dog can bark, or
On 2/8/06, Adam Kennedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Geoffrey Young wrote:
> > hi all :)
> >
> > there's a feature split I'm itching for in Test::Builder, etc - the
> > ability to call is() and have it emit TAP free from the confines of
> > plan(). not that I don't want to call plan() (or no_plan)
Stevan Little wrote:
> Yes, that is correct, because:
>
> Dog.isa(Dog) # true
> $spot.isa(Dog) # true
> ^Dog.isa(Dog) # false
>
> In fact ^Dog isa MetaClass (or Class whatever you want to call it).
>
> At least that is how I see/understand it.
OK. To help me get a better idea about what's goin
Adam Kennedy wrote:
Randy W. Sims wrote:
Adam Kennedy wrote:
This works:
---test.pl---
use Test::More tests => 1;
my $Test = Test::More->builder;
my $counter = $Test->current_test;
print qx!perl t/response.pl!;
$Test->current_test($counter + 1);
But why 1? Why not 5? or 10?
It has
# New Ticket Created by jerry gay
# Please include the string: [perl #38472]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=38472 >
well, i'm not certain my perl 6 syntax is correct (it's still a moving
target, and i'm sti
45 matches
Mail list logo
