applied workaround patch as r19136.
~jerry
hi, i'm a blockhead. ron reminded me that i'm not following C89, since
node was not defined at the top of a block. duh.
anyway, this doesn't seem to fix the problem. rats. i must misunderstand
the comment, because i find it hard to believe that adding these few
lines of code is enough to address a
i've added -R, --runcore options to parrot in r22284, with documentation
and tests. see C and C for details.
next we need to decide what to do about the old options. when do we
deprecate them? how do we migrate to the new syntax? etc. if you have
ideas, let them be known by replying here.
i sugge
On Sun Dec 16 10:31:58 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> James Keenan via RT wrote:
> > For no reason more profound than ease of editing, when I went to require
> > that each of 6 Parrot::Configure::Step methods be passed $conf
> > explicitly, I put that argument first.
> >
> > Which of course make
resolved in r24051.
~jerry
applied as r24965.
it's causing a heck of a lot of failing tests. however, i'll leave them
in for a day or three, while we see what we can do to get them passing.
hint: getting 'fudge' working on rakudo would do us a world of good.
~jerry
applied with minor modifications as r24966.
~jerry
applied with modifications as r24962.
~jerry
601 - 608 of 608 matches
Mail list logo