We have some 845 open tickets in RT, which is approximately 840 more than I'd
like to see at any one time. I closed a dozen or so today. If every active
committer could close one or two every week, we'd make real progress very
shortly.
The Bug Summary lists new issues to which no one has resp
chromatic via RT schrieb:
i. rule names start at pos 0. The colon follows immediately. Nothing
else is on that line.
ii. productions start a pos 5
iii. the '|' separating productions is at pos 3
iv. the semicolon finishing a rule is at pos 3
v. actions are either inline or start at pos 10
vi. in
On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 06:09:40PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Author: larry
> Date: Sat Mar 15 18:09:39 2008
> New Revision: 14520
> @@ -1367,9 +1367,10 @@
> If you need to force inner context to scalar, we now have convenient
> single-character context specifiers such as + for numbers an
# New Ticket Created by Bernhard Schmalhofer
# Please include the string: [perl #51758]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=51758 >
Hi,
when runnung 'make fulltest' I noticed a segfault for the 'alarm' op.
It oc
# New Ticket Created by Matt Kraai
# Please include the string: [perl #51784]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=51784 >
Howdy,
The attached patch adds a target to build a TAGS file for emacs. It's
not as feat
On Sun Mar 16 05:00:30 2008, bernhard wrote:
>
> I'm reopening this ticket, as there are still external Perl 5 modules
> in lib/Digest, lib/File, lib/IO, lib/Pod.
>
> The Perl::Critic policies in lib/Perl/Critic/Policy seem to be
> Parrot-specific.
Barney,
I understood the point of the ticket
This was applied to trunk by chromatic in r26371 and r26372.
On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 06:09:40PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> @@ -1367,9 +1367,10 @@
> If you need to force inner context to scalar, we now have convenient
> single-character context specifiers such as + for numbers and ~ for strings:
>
> +$x= g(); # scalar context an
This has been passing tests on my boxes and on smoke tests for several
days, so I am re-closing the ticket.
On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 9:10 AM, James Keenan via RT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun Mar 16 05:00:30 2008, bernhard wrote:
>
> >
> > I'm reopening this ticket, as there are still external Perl 5 modules
> > in lib/Digest, lib/File, lib/IO, lib/Pod.
> >
> > The Perl::Critic policies in lib/
No one has spoken up in defense of tools/dev/run_indent.pl. If no one
does so within 24 hours, I will yank it from the distribution and close
this ticket.
kid51
There's been no activity in this RT for more than a year, so I am
resolving the ticket.
There's been no activity in this RT for 1-3/4 years, so I'm going to
presume that the issues discussed have been resolved. Closing ticket.
My hunch is that the files being proposed for revisions in the patch in
this RT have undergone so many changes over the past two years that the
patch would no longer be valid.
If no one speaks up, I will close the ticket after this week's release.
kid51
While I think the patches proposed in this ticket are moribund, the fact
is that what little feedback we get on Cygwin indicates that many core
tests are failing during smoke testing. See, e.g.,
http://smoke.parrotcode.org/smoke/parrot-smoke-0.5.3-devel-r26408-unknown--i386-cygwin-ccache-default--
coke made this fix last month:
r25559 | coke | 2008-02-06 20:17:40 -0500 (Wed, 06 Feb 2008) | 7 lines
[t]
Update coding standard test so that someone looking at the verbose output
knows what to fix without having to read th
Paul,
Given Joshua's comments, should we still be considering this patch?
Thanks.
kid51
The issues that this thread was discussing appear to have been resolved,
but the most recent posting was a request for the development of a PDD.
Allison, Bob: Is this going to happen? If so, I think we should track
it in a separate RT so that we close this one. If not, then I will
close this ti
Jonathan: You took this RT some time back. Could you give us an update
on its status? (It's the oldest outstanding RT.)
Thank you very much.
kid51
On Mon Mar 12 05:40:14 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm still working on my use case, but it appears the new MetaClass PMC
> (src/pmc/metaclass.pmc) could use this vtable method as well; currently it
> only has an add_attribute PMETHOD.
>
Alek, Are you still planning work on this patch? (No
On Sun Feb 25 20:12:58 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> This patch changes the , , and INT> syntax in opcodes to , , and LABEL>, respectively. The argument is still an integer, however.
> This cuts the number of argument directions down by three, and only
> adds one argument type, making the cod
Jerry, Sam: There's been no activity in this thread for > 1 year.
Should we still be evaluating this patch proposal?
Thank you very much.
kid51
chromatic, allison:
Are the issues raised by this patch still relevant? (No activity in 9
months.) If not, then we should resolve the ticket.
Thank you very much.
kid51
There's been no activity in this thread for 10+ months. In the last
posting on Apr 24 2007, mdiep wrote:
>
> I was taking a look at this patch and tried to apply it, but it no
> longer applies cleanly. If you
> re-submit so that it applies cleanly, I'll check in if I can get all
> tests to pass.
On Sat Sep 08 07:07:13 2007, bernhard wrote:
>
> As the original issue has been clarified, can I close this ticket?
>
Since no one has suggested otherwise since September, I'll close it for
you :-)
kid51
Mike, Allison:
Can you give us an update as to where the issues discussed in this
thread stand? (No activity in thread since May 2007.)
Thank you very much.
kid51
On Wed May 16 04:27:03 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The results of my first post in this thread were probably caused by
> the fact that some files were not updated correctly (I am new to
> revision control). Both Allison's and Alek's patches have in fact the
> same effect.
>
> But the problem
On Thu Jun 28 10:26:30 2007, ptc wrote:
> Hi,
>
> as part of my cleaning up the usage of 'INTERP', 'Interp' and
> 'interpreter' to consistently use 'interp', as well as changing
> internal_exception()s to real_exceptions(), here are some patches
> affecting platforms I (unfortunately) don't have a
Bram, chromatic:
There's been no activity in this thread since last August. Can you give
us an update on the issues at hand?
Thank you very much.
kid51
Jim,
> Given Joshua's comments, should we still be considering this patch?
My guess is no. The compiler warning is probably gone by now anyway.
Paul
Mike,
Going through open tickets today, I noticed that there haven't been any
postings in this thread since last May.
Should we still be considering your patches? If so, can you try them
against the current SVN head and update them as needed?
Thank you very much.
kid51
Steve, Barney:
Should we still have this patch under consideration? (No activity since
last September.)
Thank you very much.
kid51
From: "James Keenan via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 09:14:43 -0700
The issues that this thread was discussing appear to have been resolved,
but the most recent posting was a request for the development of a PDD.
Allison, Bob: Is this going to happen? If so, I t
On 16/03/2008, James Keenan via RT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu Jun 28 10:26:30 2007, ptc wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > as part of my cleaning up the usage of 'INTERP', 'Interp' and
> > 'interpreter' to consistently use 'interp', as well as changing
> > internal_exception()s to real_exception
Friends,
Doing cage cleaning today, I noticed that there has been no activity in
this thread since last August. Are the issues that were under
discussion still "live"? Should we still be considering the various
patches?
Update sought. Thank you very much.
kid51
Allison,
Can you give us an update on the status of this ticket?
Thank you very much.
kid51
On Thu Nov 08 08:25:28 2007, ptc wrote:
> James,
>
> Thanks for the report! I forgot to add parrot.h to the list of
> includes. Could you add:
>
> #include "parrot/parrot.h"
>
> just before the other include statement in gcc_pcc.c and see if things
> make (after realclean) nicely for you?
>
>
# New Ticket Created by Bernhard Schmalhofer
# Please include the string: [perl #51790]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=51790 >
Hi,
running 'make fulltest' under Linux leaves me with segfaults for gdbmhast.t
On So. 09. Mär. 2008, 19:11:53, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Well, it looks like we've survived for a week without Test::Builder or
> any other Perl 5 core module in the Parrot distribution. (Thanks to
> Matt Kraai for helping out with t/perl/Parrot_Test.t.) So I think we
> can close this ticket.
>
James Keenan via RT wrote:
Jonathan: You took this RT some time back. Could you give us an update
on its status? (It's the oldest outstanding RT.)
Resolved; PDD13 specified doing it a Different Way and that bit of PDD13
is one of the bits I've gotten around to implementing too, so this is
2008/3/16, James Keenan via RT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> While I think the patches proposed in this ticket are moribund, the fact
> is that what little feedback we get on Cygwin indicates that many core
> tests are failing during smoke testing. See, e.g.,
>
> http://smoke.parrotcode.org/smoke/par
Joshua, Paul:
Can you give us an update on the status of patch still?
Thank you very much.
kid51
Per response from Paul Cochrane, resolving ticket.
On Sun Mar 16 10:04:50 2008, ptc wrote:
>
> Unfortunately, I really don't have the tuits to do much more than lurk
> these days. I also don't have access to a computer with the arm
> architecture, so I don't know if there's much more I can do as far as
> the patch is concerned (it'd be nice to t
On Sun Mar 16 10:02:32 2008, rgrjr wrote:
> I think it ought to happen, though I think Allison just wanted a ticket
> for updating existing PDDs, and not for a whole new PDD. I asked
> Allison for a clarification on 11-Mar in Will's "[oops; continuation
> 0xb6926320 of type 22 is trying to jump f
On Sat Feb 17 13:49:37 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Thursday 15 February 2007 08:24, Matt Diephouse wrote:
>
> > If you wanted to send me some sample code that invoked both a normal
> sub
> > and a MultiSub, I'd certainly take a look. I'm pretty sure the whole
> idea
> > of invoke-able obje
Added test is continuing to pass. Resolving ticket.
# New Ticket Created by Bernhard Schmalhofer
# Please include the string: [perl #51794]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=51794 >
Running 'make test' in 'languages/urm' gives me complaints about
_export_to_lev
On 16/03/2008, James Keenan via RT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Paul,
>
> I see that you touched src/pmc/pair.pmc after your last post in this thread.
>
>
> r22490 | paultcochrane | 2007-10-25 16:10:19 -0400 (Thu, 25 Oct 20
Thanks for the update. I think I'll leave this ticket open for a few
more days in the hope that Matt and Steve comment.
On Sun Mar 16 10:34:00 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Resolved; PDD13 specified doing it a Different Way and that bit of PDD13
> is one of the bits I've gotten around to implementing too, so this is
> fixed in both spec and implementation.
>
Resolving our oldest ticket! Thanks, Jonathan.
On 16/03/2008, James Keenan via RT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu Nov 08 08:25:28 2007, ptc wrote:
>
> > James,
> >
> > Thanks for the report! I forgot to add parrot.h to the list of
> > includes. Could you add:
> >
> > #include "parrot/parrot.h"
> >
> > just before the other include
Cage cleaning question: Can we get an update on the status of the patch
proposed in this ticket?
Thank you very much.
kid51
Can any of our Win32 developers examine this?
Thanks.
On 16/03/2008, James Keenan via RT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Joshua, Paul:
>
> Can you give us an update on the status of patch still?
As far as I remember, it still needs to be tested on the various runcores.
Paul
James Keenan via RT wrote:
> There's been no activity in this thread since last August. Can you give
> us an update on the issues at hand?
I haven't got the problem in a while, so I think it's disappeared. I
haven't watched the list closely enough to say why, but I guess it's over.
Cheers,
Bram
# New Ticket Created by Matt Kraai
# Please include the string: [perl #51798]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=51798 >
Howdy,
The attached patch fixes the following warnings:
make[1]: Entering directory `/ho
# New Ticket Created by Matt Kraai
# Please include the string: [perl #51796]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=51796 >
Howdy,
When I run "make headerizer", it adds a prototype for pobj_flag_dump
to src/packdu
On Sun Mar 16 10:57:07 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Matt, chromatic:
>
> This test is still in TODO status as of r26404. Can you provide us with
> an update as to the ticket's status?
>
> Thank you very much.
> kid51
Sure. I investigated the issue a while back, and the whole thing is basica
I've updated the patch to also add tuples to pynie.
Arcady
pynie-list-tuple.patch
Description: Binary data
On Feb 7, 2008, at 4:37 AM, Arcady Goldmints-Orlov (via RT) wrote:
# New Ticket Created by "Arcady Goldmints-Orlov"
# Please include the string: [perl #50616]
# in the subject lin
On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 8:09 AM, James Keenan via RT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There's been no activity in this RT for more than a year, so I am
> resolving the ticket.
>
we have a category for this called 'stalled'. it's a better reflection
of status than 'closed' in cases like this in my opi
On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 11:05 AM, James Keenan via RT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No one has spoken up in defense of tools/dev/run_indent.pl. If no one
> does so within 24 hours, I will yank it from the distribution and close
> this ticket.
+1, please do.
> kid51
>
>
--
Will "Coke" Coled
Resolved per discussion with ptc.
On Sunday 16 March 2008 12:16:06 Matt Diephouse via RT wrote:
> Sure. I investigated the issue a while back, and the whole thing is
> basically stalled. The code surrounding the issue (the packfile code) is a
> bit of a mess, which made finding a real fix difficult. I started to work
> on refactor
From: "James Keenan via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 10:46:15 -0700
On Sun Mar 16 10:02:32 2008, rgrjr wrote:
> I think it ought to happen, though I think Allison just wanted a ticket
> for updating existing PDDs, and not for a whole new PDD. I asked
> Allison
chromatic wrote:
To recap, I think this bug will require a substantial refactoring and
cleanup of the packfile code. For now, I believe it's a non-trivial bug
(except, perhaps, for someone with a more thorough understanding of the
packfile code).
Agreed.
Same here.
I believe Jonathan
On Saturday 23 February 2008 14:23:19 Klaas-Jan Stol wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 5:00 PM, Ron Blaschke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The issue seems to be caused by languages/c99/src/preamble, where:
> >
> > .local $iter_loop:
> >
> > Consider this test program.
> >
> > $cat m.pir
> > .macro
On Sunday 16 March 2008 09:19:47 Matt Kraai wrote:
> The attached patch fixes the following warnings:
>
> make[1]: Entering directory `/home/kraai/src/parrot/languages'
> Makefile:352: warning: overriding commands for target `dotnet.realclean'
> Makefile:242: warning: ignoring old commands for tar
On Sunday 16 March 2008 08:28:59 Matt Kraai wrote:
> When I run "make headerizer", it adds a prototype for pobj_flag_dump
> to src/packdump.c. The attached patch contains this change.
Thanks, applied as r26428.
-- c
On Thursday 14 February 2008 21:11:36 Andrew Whitworth wrote:
> Forgot the patch in the last email.
Thanks, applied as r26429.
-- c
On Monday 10 March 2008 07:24:44 François Perrad wrote:
> chromatic wrote:
> > I fixed all of the compilation errors I could find as of r26285. 280
> > tests fail on the trunk for me and 308 fail on the branch, but they don't
> > look like compilation errors or PDD 17 porting errors.
> I think
Contributors to this thread:
Can you give us an update on the issues that were being discussed?
(There's been no activity in thread for 6 months.)
Thank you very much.
kid51
Can someone more familiar than I am with C header files take a look at
this patch? Thank you very much.
73 matches
Mail list logo
