Geoffrey Broadwell via RT wrote:
What is the replacement for the old "regular" variants that use a
pre-existing destination?
A few years ago when I was doing copious Perl 5 PDL work, I found that
in certain loops I would get bottlenecked entirely by creation and
destruction of temporaries. I m
On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 10:07 PM, Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Opcode names are not reserved words in PIR, and may be used as variable
>> names.
>> For example, you can define a local variable named C. [See RT
>> #24251]
>> +Note that by using an opc
Bob Rogers wrote:
Just "single dispatch". A method that's single dispatched, is... a method.
True. Nevertheless, the two kinds of method are treated quite
differently by Parrot, both when being defined and when being called.
That is why it is awkward not to have concise names for both kinds
Author: kjs
Date: Fri Aug 29 02:22:05 2008
New Revision: 30632
Modified:
trunk/docs/pdds/pdd19_pir.pod
Log:
[pdd19] list all PIR reserved words.
Modified: trunk/docs/pdds/pdd19_pir.pod
==
--- trunk/docs/pdds/pdd19_pir
Author: kjs
Date: Fri Aug 29 03:13:05 2008
New Revision: 30633
Modified:
trunk/docs/pdds/pdd19_pir.pod
Log:
[pdd19] remove a previously added line of mine which I no longer understand
myself. Something about subroutine identifiers and hiding opnames.
Modified: trunk/docs/pdds/pdd19_pir.pod
=
PDB_next no longer executes opcodes by himself, now is done in the
debugger runloop. Closing ticket.
While writing something like a LISP reader I found this bug. To replicate it
this is enough:
proto prefix:<'> is looser('term:') { ... }
The problem is that the ' in the name of the operators aren't escaped.
The patch I attached uses library/Data/Escape.pbc to escape the names. The only
modifi
# New Ticket Created by "Carl Mäsak"
# Please include the string: [perl #58424]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=58424 >
r30590:
$ ./perl6 -e 'regex a { b }; "b" ~~ a'
too few arguments passed (0) - 2 params e
Forwarding to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to open a ticket.
After applying the patch all tests except a codingstd test (trailing
whitespace) still pass, but since I'm not familiar with PGE I wait for
somebody else (Patrick?) to apply it. Instead I attached a version of
the patch without the trailing whitesp
From: Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 11:19:37 +0200
Bob Rogers wrote:
>
>Just "single dispatch". A method that's single dispatched, is... a
method.
>
> True. Nevertheless, the two kinds of method are treated quite
> differently by Parrot,
# New Ticket Created by NotFound
# Please include the string: [perl #58438]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=58438 >
I was doing a simple test of NCI calls with the xlib function
XDisplayName, and found that n
Bob Rogers wrote:
So you prefer the plain term "method" for "method that is not a
multimethod"? That seems prone to confusion. What do you suggest for
the generic term?
It's not prone to confusion. By definition, a "method" is a invoked on a
single invocant (an instance of the class that co
On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 08:32:41AM -0700, Carl Mäsak wrote:
> r30590:
> $ ./perl6 -e 'regex a { b }; "b" ~~ a'
> too few arguments passed (0) - 2 params expected
> [...]
>
> I've also added tests for this in t/spec/S05-metasyntax/regex.t.
>
> (S05 is not entirely clear as to whether this should a
Allison Randal schrieb:
Reini Urban wrote:
A new idea:
===
#IF(darwin):
#ALSO:# MACOSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET must be defined for OS X
#ALSO:export MACOSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET := @osx_version@
Just a little too much complexity, for not enough benefit.
The POD for this change:
Looks good.
[Subject changed to pdd30_install, as we are talking about this the
whole time]
Allison Randal schrieb:
Will Coleda wrote:
At the moment I'm planning for language pbcs to go into
.../parrot/library/ so they can be easily accessed via
load_bytecode. I've found that in a dynamic environment lik
Patrick (>), Carl (>>):
>> r30590:
>> $ ./perl6 -e 'regex a { b }; "b" ~~ a'
>> too few arguments passed (0) - 2 params expected
>> [...]
>>
>> I've also added tests for this in t/spec/S05-metasyntax/regex.t.
>>
>> (S05 is not entirely clear as to whether this should actually work.
>> IMHO, there's
Reini Urban wrote:
Problem:
Most packages will not accept packages with /usr/bin/scheme,
/usr/bin/lisp, /usr/bin/forth, /usr/bin/lua, /usr/bin/tclsh
were these are the parrot implementations.
Of course we don't want to hijack existing language executables in the
distribution packages. But,
Reini Urban wrote:
I hope you know that this #+() syntax is the only existing syntax.
It is widely used since about 20 years.
The rest is something new we came up with.
It's high time for a little progress. Sheesh, in 1988 we were excited by
computers with 1 MB of RAM. ;)
Allison
2008/8/29 Allison Randal:
> Reini Urban wrote:
>> Current exceptions for the "parrot-" prefix:
>> perl6
>
> Actually, that probably won't be an exception to the "parrot-" prefix on the
> package name, since there are multiple implementations of Perl 6.
Ok, so there will be pugs, perl -Mv6 and rak
On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 10:28 PM, James Keenan via RT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No objections so far. If I hear none, I will apply this patch this weekend.
>
Question I have which may be addressed somewhere already. Based on a
quick skim of the sample config file:
If I want to run my config b
On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 11:56 AM, Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Reini Urban wrote:
>>
>> I hope you know that this #+() syntax is the only existing syntax.
>> It is widely used since about 20 years.
>> The rest is something new we came up with.
>
> It's high time for a little progress
On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 10:55 AM, Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Reini Urban wrote:
>>
>> Problem:
>>
>> Most packages will not accept packages with /usr/bin/scheme,
>> /usr/bin/lisp, /usr/bin/forth, /usr/bin/lua, /usr/bin/tclsh
>> were these are the parrot implementations.
>
> Of cour
Reini Urban wrote:
Ok, so there will be pugs, perl -Mv6 and rakudo | parrot-perl6
Maybe both /usr/bin/rakudo and /usr/bin/perl6 should be symlinked to
/usr/bin/parrot-perl6 then.
Currently there's only a /usr/bin/perl6 being installed.
This really should be made ready for the September release.
Will Coleda wrote:
It's important to keep in mind that for the most part, at least on
unix-related operating systems, executables for a particular language will
simply be an 'ln -s' to /usr/bin/parrot (taking advantage of the $0
executable name information to set up certain configuration for the
On Fri Aug 29 09:11:37 2008, coke wrote:
>
> If I want to run my config based on the contents of a file, how do I
> get the ordered lists of steps to run? Can I assume a sane default or
> must I be explicit?
>
In this first version of file-based configuration, you have to be
explicit, i.e., you
2008/8/29 Will Coleda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 11:56 AM, Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Reini Urban wrote:
>>>
>>> I hope you know that this #+() syntax is the only existing syntax.
>>> It is widely used since about 20 years.
>>> The rest is something new we came
On Friday 29 August 2008 10:04:44 Reini Urban wrote:
> perl5 even lost undump around that time and the perl compiler was axed last
> year.
Economic realities often trump idealism. I'd like to see a working Perl 5
compiler suite as well, but I don't have the time to do it, and no one seems
to
2008/8/29 chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Friday 29 August 2008 10:04:44 Reini Urban wrote:
>> perl5 even lost undump around that time and the perl compiler was axed last
>> year.
>
> Economic realities often trump idealism. I'd like to see a working Perl 5
> compiler suite as well, but I don'
On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 06:10:21PM +0200, Reini Urban wrote:
> 2008/8/29 Allison Randal:
> > Reini Urban wrote:
> >> Current exceptions for the "parrot-" prefix:
> >> perl6
> >
> > Actually, that probably won't be an exception to the "parrot-" prefix on the
> > package name, since there are multip
Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 06:10:21PM +0200, Reini Urban wrote:
2008/8/29 Allison Randal:
... the $0 handling will be built in to Parrot, so the
user could also easily create their own 'ln -s' aliases.
Within the PCT::HLLCompiler I assume.
PCT::HLLCompiler can't do it
Reini Urban wrote:
And I'm tempted to add: Actually even the 1984 version of lisps are
still technically and syntax-wise far advanced over the perl and
parrot state of today. I see not much of a progress.
Philosophically, I agree. In my usual Parrot architecture talk there's a
slide right at
On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 11:06 AM, Klaas-Jan Stol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 10:07 PM, Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>>> Opcode names are not reserved words in PIR, and may be used as variable
>>> names.
>>> For example, yo
Lets say I want to find the 5th smallest element in an array. I might write:
@array.sort.[4];
How does the implementation of the sort function know that I just want
to 5th item (and thus choose an appropriate optimization)? Obviously the
function could be told that it's caller wants 5 values
Correct that this is a bug, but the patch using Data/Escape.pbc is
a bit problematic. Data/Escape.pbc is woefully out of date, and also
has problems in that it doesn't correctly generate PIR constants for
unicode strings, as would be the case with:
proto prefix:<«> { ... }
So, the solution i
# New Ticket Created by Moritz Lenz
# Please include the string: [perl #58452]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=58452 >
Forwarding to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to open a ticket.
After applying the patch all tests exc
2008/8/29 James Keenan via RT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> This dependence has been eliminated from 20 of the 76 current
> configuration step tests. More to come.
>
On MinGW32 (ie gcc on Win32), there are new failure since r30361
D:\fperrad\Parrot\trunk>perl t\steps\auto_msvc-01.t
1..39
ok 1 - use con
On Fri Aug 29 13:58:19 2008, fperrad wrote:
> 2008/8/29 James Keenan via RT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > This dependence has been eliminated from 20 of the 76 current
> > configuration step tests. More to come.
> >
>
> On MinGW32 (ie gcc on Win32), there are new failure since r30361
>
Thanks for th
Author: jkeenan
Date: Fri Aug 29 16:17:10 2008
New Revision: 30643
Modified:
trunk/docs/pdds/draft/pdd30_install.pod (contents, props changed)
trunk/docs/pdds/draft/pdd31_hll_interop.pod (contents, props changed)
Changes in other areas also in this revision:
Modified:
trunk/languages
Author: jkeenan
Date: Fri Aug 29 16:21:00 2008
New Revision: 30644
Modified:
trunk/docs/pdds/draft/pdd30_install.pod
Log:
Rebreak a couple of lines in error reporting to prevent
t/codingstd/linelength.t from failing.
Modified: trunk/docs/pdds/draft/pdd30_install.pod
=
From: "Reini Urban" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 19:04:44 +0200
>> Reini Urban wrote:
>>>
>>> I hope you know that this #+() syntax is the only existing syntax.
>>> It is widely used since about 20 years.
>>> The rest is something new we came up with.
As the tok
From: Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 16:03:24 +0200
Bob Rogers wrote:
> By "multi" do you mean "multisub" or "multimethod"? Either way, it
> seems there is something missing from your enumeration above.
A multi (that is a MultiSub PMC) can be invoked
41 matches
Mail list logo
