On Saturday 30 December 2006 15:42, James Keenan wrote:
> I think part of the problem is that, in the case of the 8 test files
> and lib/Parrot/Pmc2c/Utils.pm, I was submitting completely new files
> (hence, svn adds) rather than patching existing files. Since I don't
> have commit privileges, I
On Dec 30, 2006, at 2:56 PM, chromatic via RT wrote:
Here's what I get on an x86 Linux machine:
/usr/bin/perl t/harness t/tools/pmc2cutils/00-qualify.t
[snip]
t/tools/pmc2cutils/01-pmc2cutils.
# Failed test (t/tools/pmc2cutils/01-pmc2cutils.t at line 48)
# Parrot::Pmc2c::Utils->c
README
Description: Binary data
MANIFEST.patch
Description: Binary data
Following a suggestion made earlier today by Coke, I am submitting
this file for t/tools/pmc2utils/.
kid51
On Dec 30, 2006, at 12:31 PM, Will Coleda via RT wrote:
Perhaps a helpful failure message when run at the wrong time would
help.
In a patch to t/tools/pmc2cutils/00-qualify.t which I just submitted,
I have included such an explanatory message which will print out if
you run it with 'p
On Dec 30, 2006, at 12:31 PM, Will Coleda via RT wrote:
Perhaps a helpful failure message when run at the wrong time would
help.
And, inspired by your t/perl/README, I have submitted one for t/tools/
pmc2cutils/.
kid51
On Dec 30, 2006, at 1:06 AM, Kevin Tew via RT wrote:
I modified the root.in changes to follow the conventions already
present
in the file.
Kevin, I had hoped that creating a 'make' target in config/gen/
makefiles/root.in would provide a convenient way to run my tests of
Parrot::Pmc2c::
On Sat, Dec 30, 2006 at 09:39:39AM -0800, Bernhard Schmalhofer via RT wrote:
> On Sa. 30. Dez. 2006, 01:44:38, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > This patch makes code struct and output of examples/pasm/stack.pasm
> > more consistent, for example:
>
> Thanks, applied in revision 16335.
>
> I also upda
At 9:34 AM + 12/29/06, Luke Palmer wrote:
When do we do integer/rational math and when do we do floating point math?
That is, is 1 different from 1.0? Should 10**500 be infinity or a 1
with 500 zeroes after it? Should 10**10**6 run out of memory? Should
"say (1/3)**500" print a bunch of d
Darren Duncan wrote:
Following from this, I propose that we have distinct-looking
operators (not just multis) that users can explicitly choose when
they want to do integer division/modulus or non-integer
division/modulus.
I don't know if the following constitutes a problem or not; but the
one o
"Luke Palmer" schreef:
> When do we do integer/rational math and when do we do floating point
> math?
>
> That is, is 1 different from 1.0? Should 10**500 be infinity or a 1
> with 500 zeroes after it? Should 10**10**6 run out of memory? Should
> "say (1/3)**500" print a bunch of digits to the
On 12/31/06, Darren Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
For example, we could have:
div - integer division
mod - integer modulus
/ - number division
% - number modulus
Or alternately:
idiv - integer division
imod - integer modulus
ndiv - number division
nmod - number
11 matches
Mail list logo
