Re: RFD: Built-in testing

2009-01-21 Thread Richard Hainsworth
(Daniel Ruoso also proposed to call the adverb :test instead of :ok, making it easier to read but a bit longer; my happiness doesn't depend on the exact name, but of course we can discuss it once we have settled on this scheme, if we do so). My two-cents worth: The adverb on a boolean chan

Re: RFD: Built-in testing

2009-01-21 Thread Carl Mäsak
Moritz (>): > So Larry and Patrick developed the idea of creating an > adverb on the test operator instead: > >$x == 1e5 :ok('the :ok makes this is a test'); I'm trying to explain to myself why I don't like this idea at all. I'm only partially successful. Other people seem to have no problem

[perl #62568] [BUG] Intermittant I/O test failures

2009-01-21 Thread publiustemp-perl6compil...@yahoo.com (via RT)
# New Ticket Created by publiustemp-perl6compil...@yahoo.com # Please include the string: [perl #62568] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=62568 > I've been trying to update Test.pm but I'm getting bitten by int

Re: RFD: Built-in testing

2009-01-21 Thread Peter Scott
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 13:35:50 +0100, Carl Mäsak wrote: > Moritz (>): >> So Larry and Patrick developed the idea of creating an adverb on the >> test operator instead: >> >>$x == 1e5 :ok('the :ok makes this is a test'); > > I'm trying to explain to myself why I don't like this idea at all. I'

Test.pm and skip()

2009-01-21 Thread Ovid
The skip multisub in Rakudo's Test.pm is defined like this: multi sub skip() is export() { proclaim(1, "# SKIP"); } multi sub skip($desc) is export() { proclaim(1, "# SKIP " ~ $desc); } multi sub skip($count, $desc) is export() { for 1..$count { proclaim(

Re: RFD: Built-in testing

2009-01-21 Thread Geoffrey Broadwell
On Wed, 2009-01-21 at 14:23 +, Peter Scott wrote: > On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 13:35:50 +0100, Carl Mäsak wrote: > > I'm trying to explain to myself why I don't like this idea at all. I'm > > only partially successful. Other people seem to have no problem with it, > > so I might just be wrong, or part

r24991 - docs/Perl6/Spec

2009-01-21 Thread pugs-commits
Author: moritz Date: 2009-01-21 20:54:56 +0100 (Wed, 21 Jan 2009) New Revision: 24991 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S29-functions.pod Log: [S29] changed outdated notice about document location, noticed by Coke++ Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S29-functions.pod =

r24993 - docs/Perl6/Spec

2009-01-21 Thread pugs-commits
Author: lwall Date: 2009-01-21 21:49:51 +0100 (Wed, 21 Jan 2009) New Revision: 24993 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S03-operators.pod docs/Perl6/Spec/S12-objects.pod Log: [S03] more alignment with STD [S12] monkey patching now requires a special "use MONKEY_PATCHING" at the top Modified: docs/P

Re: RFD: Built-in testing

2009-01-21 Thread Ovid
- Original Message > From: Moritz Lenz > * the word 'is' is overloaded in Perl 6 >* if we export subs is() and ok(), we clutter the > namespace with subs with short names >* is() is rather imprecise; it doesn't say *how* > things are compared. > So Larry and Patr

Re: RFD: Built-in testing

2009-01-21 Thread jerry gay
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 13:44, Ovid wrote: > - Original Message > >> From: Moritz Lenz > >> * the word 'is' is overloaded in Perl 6 >>* if we export subs is() and ok(), we clutter the >> namespace with subs with short names >>* is() is rather imprecise; it doesn't say *h

r24994 - docs/Perl6/Spec

2009-01-21 Thread pugs-commits
Author: lwall Date: 2009-01-22 00:35:56 +0100 (Thu, 22 Jan 2009) New Revision: 24994 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S02-bits.pod docs/Perl6/Spec/S03-operators.pod Log: [S02,S03] delete some .pos fossils Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S02-bits.pod =

Re: [perl #48014] [DEPRECATED] PMC union struct

2009-01-21 Thread Christoph Otto
Allison Randal via RT wrote: Christoph Otto wrote: Allison Randal wrote: (Actually, at the moment you're required to declare all parent attributes in the ATTR list before the child attributes, so inherited attributes *are* child attributes.) When I say "attributes", I mean the things that are

Re: [perl #48014] [DEPRECATED] PMC union struct

2009-01-21 Thread chromatic
On Wednesday 21 January 2009 17:23:42 Christoph Otto wrote: > If there's a cheaper way to implement this and still support C-level PMC > ATTR multiple inheritance, I'll be thrilled to implement it. We've never really supported C-level PMC multiple inheritance. As best I can figure, it was a qui

Re: [perl #62568] [BUG] Intermittant I/O test failures

2009-01-21 Thread Jonathan Worthington
publiustemp-perl6compil...@yahoo.com (via RT) wrote: I've been trying to update Test.pm but I'm getting bitten by intermittent failures in I/O tests when I run "make spectest". These usually happen in t/spec/S16-filehandles/io_in_for_loops.t and t/spec/S16-filehandles/io_in_while_loops.t. The

Re: [perl #62568] [BUG] Intermittant I/O test failures

2009-01-21 Thread Moritz Lenz
Jonathan Worthington wrote: > publiustemp-perl6compil...@yahoo.com (via RT) wrote: >> I've been trying to update Test.pm but I'm getting bitten by intermittent >> failures in I/O tests when I run "make spectest". These usually happen in >> t/spec/S16-filehandles/io_in_for_loops.t and >> t/spe

Re: [perl #48014] [DEPRECATED] PMC union struct

2009-01-21 Thread Allison Randal
Christoph Otto wrote: The PMC UnionVal deprecation can't be completed until Parrot has improved ATTR reuse between extending PMCs. I'm rewriting code to minimize dependence on the PMC_x_val macros, but I can't eliminate them completely without better inheritance support. I'd like to implemen