I've just convinced myself that Tcl's problem is an interaction with the .HLL
directive and PBC. That is to say, the assumption that you can freeze PMC
Subs and thaw them in a different process is broken.
Why?
Subs may have an association with a HLL. Right now, that's an integer--the
unique
On 08/16/07 Ron Blaschke wrote:
> > This optimization reaches likely back to times, when the opcode engine was
> > designed. It's saving one interpreter push statement [1] per JIT calling
> > one
> > external function, and I've always thought of it as a very cool (and valid)
> > thingy, when I
On Aug 16, 2007, at 5:25 AM, Paolo Molaro wrote:
On 08/16/07 Ron Blaschke wrote:
The optimization done by the parrot jit is invalid for the x86 C
calling
convention: the area of memory containing the passed arguments
can be used as scratch space by the called function.
If you can make sure it
Changed [ 'Test::More' ] to [ 'Test'; 'More' ]
Patch level 1
Source: 4c149bba-1ebb-4b29-940e-6c2cefc7587e:/parrot/local:599
Target: d31e2699-5ff4-0310-a27c-f18f2fbe73fe:/trunk:20643
(https://svn.perl.org/parrot/trunk)
Log:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]: cheepy | 2007-07-14 05:14:58 -0400
Cre
Hi,
Sorry I just read the docs/submissions.pod and realized I shouldn't
have submit the patch here. I'll resubmit it in proper way to
parrotbug.
--
Thanks,
Badai Aqrandista (cheepy)
On Thursday 16 August 2007 15:50:25 Badai Aqrandista via RT wrote:
> Sorry I just read the docs/submissions.pod and realized I shouldn't
> have submit the patch here. I'll resubmit it in proper way to
> parrotbug.
It's fine here; don't worry.
-- c
> Apparently the plan is to go in the opposite direction, i.e., getting that
> stuff out of the Parrot distribution and into Bundle::Parrot on CPAN.
How would the naming work there? I was trying to reduce the amount of
keying required to invoke functions, and to keep their invocation the same
as
On Friday 17 August 2007 04:24:10 Badai Aqrandista wrote:
> Changed [ 'Test::More' ] to [ 'Test'; 'More' ]
Thanks, applied as r20648.
By the way, the justification for this is that PDD 15 says (or at least
should) that the proper approach to namespace nesting is to use keys, not
n-delimited st
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Apparently the plan is to go in the opposite direction, i.e.,
getting that
>> stuff out of the Parrot distribution and into Bundle::Parrot on CPAN.
>
> How would the naming work there?
Not exactly certain what naming you're referring to ...
> I was trying to reduce
