I have seen now that the functions if'ed out by DO_LOOP_OPTIMIZATION
are mentioned and proposed for deletion in #46291, this ticket can be
merged with him or closed.
--
Salu2
> In src/objects.c:Parrot_add_attribute() there is the todo item:
This function was dead code and has been deleted in #45989
/ * TODO check if someone is trying to add attributes to a parent class
* while there are already child class attrs
*/
The checks are in add_parent on the class pmc.
The
On Tue, Oct 2, 2007 at 7:47 PM, via RT Paul Cochrane
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In src/objects.c:Parrot_new_class() there is the todo item:
>
> /* TODO create all class structures in constant PMC pool */
This function no longer exists. Looks like class creation now is done
by calling pmc_new_in
On Tue, Oct 2, 2007 at 7:43 PM, via RT Paul Cochrane
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In src/objects.c fail_if_exist() has the todo item:
> XXX uses global class registry
> I'm guessing by this comment that it shouldn't?
This function no longer exists.
--
Salu2
On Tue, Oct 2, 2007 at 7:44 PM, via RT Paul Cochrane
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In src/objects.c there is the todo item within fail_if_exist():
> /* TODO get printable name */
This function no longer exists.
--
Salu2
# New Ticket Created by Moritz Lenz
# Please include the string: [perl #54182]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=54182 >
Attached patch fixes the syntax errors that prevent languages/PIR to
build in r27508.
St
"John M. Dlugosz" wrote:
> Carl Mäsak cmasak-at-gmail.com |Perl 6| wrote:
> > Pm (>):
> >
> > > In Rakudo's case, we just haven't implemented read-only traits
> > > on variables yet.
> >>
> >
> > Goodie. I guessed as much.
> >
> >
> >> But yes, I expect that it will be caught as
> > > a
"Me Here" (>), John (>>), Carl (>>>), Patrick ():
>> >> But yes, I expect that it will be caught as
>> > > a compile-time error.
>> >>
>> >
>> > And do you agree it's reasonable to expect this of every compiler?
>>
>> I think that is the point of declared types. But, something like
>>
>> no s
On 2008 May 15, at 1:30, Me Here wrote:
"John M. Dlugosz" wrote:
no strong_type_check :rw
in scope can turn that off, in case you want to play dirty tricks.
What is the point of be able to mark things readonly if the compiler
does reject assignment attempts?
(assuming you meant "doesn't")
On Thu May 15 01:17:26 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 2, 2007 at 7:43 PM, via RT Paul Cochrane
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > In src/objects.c fail_if_exist() has the todo item:
> > XXX uses global class registry
> > I'm guessing by this comment that it shouldn't?
>
> This funct
PDD15 says:
: =item - Objects may have a custom vtable or use a class-wide vtable.
How does one do this?
Also, at one time it was mentioned that we would have a way to
add roles to individual objects -- is that still on the table?
Pm
Closed.
Closed.
On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 5:28 PM, via RT Paul Cochrane
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> # XXX
> # in plain functional run-loop result is 999
> # other run-loops report 998
> # TODO investigate this after interpreter strtup is done
> # see also TODO in src/embed.c
I can't reproduce the problem, and loo
I said:
> The attached short PIR program shows the problem -- parrot segfaults on
> the first shift operation when iterating over a namespace.
It turns out that the namespace was a red herring. The real problem is
that when iterating over a hash, you cannot assign to a PMC register; it
must be a
# New Ticket Created by Geoffrey Broadwell
# Please include the string: [perl #54220]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=54220 >
The attached short PIR program shows the problem -- parrot segfaults on
the first
"Carl Mäsak" wrote:
> > What is the point of marking things readonly if you can turn it off?
>
> There are many possible reasons, I think.
>
> * The code that declares the variable readonly might not be available
> to you (compiled to bytecode, fetched by RCP etc),
> * or it might be available b
# New Ticket Created by NotFound
# Please include the string: [perl #54230]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=54230 >
Hello.
Parrot lacks loop avoidance in class hierarchy. This examples segfaults:
.sub main
On Sunday 02 September 2007 10:37:13 Jeff Horwitz wrote:
> not surprisingly, it looks like some symbols in libparrot conflict with
> exported symbols from other libraries. i ran into this when testing
> mod_parrot on an apache server with PHP 5 configured:
>
> Program received signal SIGSEGV, Seg
# New Ticket Created by Geoffrey Broadwell
# Please include the string: [perl #54236]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=54236 >
As seen in 54220, I discovered to my chagrin that not only do Parrot
hashes have o
Overloading "final" was Java's rather inept attempt to define objects with value semantics rather than container semantics
Can you tell me more about that, or point to something?
21 matches
Mail list logo
