On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 11:13:45AM -0700, jerry gay wrote:
> then what the heck does c89 compliance mean for parrot, if it's beyond
> our control because we can't change system headers? i mean, how do you
The Parrot code itself can be C89 compliant, such that Parrot contains no
issues that preven
hi,
recently a patch was supplied and applied for odbc32.lib being linked into
parrot.
This file is not needed for Parrot, but it seems it is still linked (at
least, here on my machine, winxp).
\parrot\library\PAST-pm.pbc
C:\Perl\bin\perl.exe -e "chdir shift @ARGV;system 'nmake',
'-nolog
Hi,
Attached a new version of the patch, I did some more work on cleaning up and
commenting where I could (going top-down, so not for long finished... hint
hint)
Hope this helps,
klaas-jan
On 5/18/07, Parrot via RT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Greetings,
This message has been automatically
Author: larry
Date: Fri May 18 10:41:09 2007
New Revision: 14393
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
Log:
Shouldn't generally define immutable types in terms of mutable ones.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
===
# New Ticket Created by Klaas-Jan Stol
# Please include the string: [perl #42992]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=42992 >
Hi,
attached a patch starting a bit of cleanup for debug.c
* pointer declarations sh
# New Ticket Created by Eric Hanchrow
# Please include the string: [perl #42996]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=42996 >
Add a new TODO test for iterator cloning: make sure that we're not
accidentally copyin
I wanted to reply to this before you left on vacation, but Thunderbird
crashed taking several unfinished replies with it. (Fresh install, which
I hadn't yet configured to automatically save drafts.)
So, the abbreviated version...
Mike Mattie wrote:
Hello,
I have been working on implementing
Another one wiped out by Thunderbird crash.
tewk wrote:
Allison Randal wrote:
tewk wrote:
Patch was to large to attach so: http://tewk.com/pdd15_testing.diff
Tests currently fail because they use the "new" opcode to instantiate
objects.
Fixing the 'new' opcode is the first change we need
