Piers Cawley wrote:
The Continu(ation)ing Saga
Jonathan Sillito posted a longish meditation on Parrot's new
continuation passing calling conventions. He wondered if, now we have
continuation passing, we really needed the various register stacks that
were used in the old stack base
If memory serves me right, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> It's possible to just go ahead and do it *all* at runtime, and have
> no compile time component at all--just a series of "newclass,
> addparent, addattribute" ops, assuming those are the op names we go
> with. Classes just get created at code init
On Fri, 2003-06-06 at 21:47, Benjamin Goldberg wrote:
> And for the former... well, we'd be wasting half of the memory that's in
> our "32-bit" registers (since we'd still use 64 bits of storage for each
> of our registers, even though we're "using" only 32 bits of it), but
> there's no speed penal
On Fri, 2003-06-06 at 16:34, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> > *) Integer constants are limited to 32 bit signed integers because
> > they're inline.
>
> Yep. But this will cause problems with JIT/Prederef and multi threading,
> and its already causing problems inside JIT on architectures with only
> sma
On Fri, 2003-06-06 at 15:12, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> Our options, as I see them, are:
>
> 1) Make the I registers 64 bits
> 2) Make some way to gang together I registers to make 64 bit things
> 3) Have I registers switchable between 32 and 64 bit somehow
> 4) Have separate 32 and 64 bit I registers
Dan Sugalski wrote:
The issue is metadata. How do you declare a class' inheritance
hierarchy, its interfaces, its attributes, and its type? (At the very
least, there's probably more) I can see the following .
1) A class subclasses a single parent.
2) A class subclasses a single parent and adds
This should let parrot compile with the free command lind tools from Borland.
Cheers
--
Andrew The
Index: config/init/hints/mswin32.pl
===
RCS file: /cvs/public/parrot/config/init/hints/mswin32.pl,v
retrieving revision 1.10
diff -
On Mon, 2003-06-09 at 15:23, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> Brian Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Its been a while since I've looked at parrot, so I did a "cvs update
> > -d", "perl Configure.pl", "make clean", "make" and build failed:
>
> $ make realclean
>
> should help. We don't have all depe
Dan Sugalski wrote:
Well, we can make objects and we can call methods on objects (at least
the interface is specified, if not actually implemented) but actually
building classes to make objects out of is still unspecified. So, time
to remedy that, after which I hope we can build at least a simpl
Brian Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Its been a while since I've looked at parrot, so I did a "cvs update
> -d", "perl Configure.pl", "make clean", "make" and build failed:
$ make realclean
should help. We don't have all dependencies in generated files sorted out
that far - sorry.
> It can
Well, we can make objects and we can call methods on objects (at
least the interface is specified, if not actually implemented) but
actually building classes to make objects out of is still
unspecified. So, time to remedy that, after which I hope we can build
at least a simple "ParrotObject" cl
Its been a while since I've looked at parrot, so I did a "cvs update
-d", "perl Configure.pl", "make clean", "make" and build failed:
$ make
gcc -o parrot -L/usr/local/lib test_main.o blib/lib/libparrot.a -lnsl
-ldl -lm -lpthread -lcrypt -lutil
blib/lib/libparrot.a(jit_cpu.o)(.text+0x2ce0): In f
The Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 20030608
It's another Monday, it's another summary and I need to get this
finished so I can starting getting the house in order before we head off
to Boca Raton and points north and west on the long road to Portland,
Oregon. Via Vermont. (I'm E
13 matches
Mail list logo
