Author: coke
Date: Tue Oct 10 19:16:37 2006
New Revision: 14888
Modified:
trunk/docs/pdds/clip/pddXX_cstruct.pod (props changed)
trunk/docs/pdds/clip/pddXX_pmc.pod (props changed)
Changes in other areas also in this revision:
Modified:
trunk/ (props changed)
trunk/apps/p3/README
From: François PERRAD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 13:39:30 +0200
Thank for your long response.
I included your code in languages/lua/lib/luacoroutine.pir (r14877).
I encountered 2 problems :
1) coroutine_yield needs a current coroutine (not surprising)
Yes, this
Am Dienstag, 10. Oktober 2006 21:32 schrieb chromatic:
> > new P0, [class],
>
> Is a PMC (Hash) or a list of named arguments? Creating a Hash for
> every initializer is a real bummer in PIR.
As said, ought to be everything conforming to current calling
conventions.
o = new .TypeId, 1, 'b
On Tuesday 10 October 2006 12:23, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> PPS: new opcode variant count is 20 now.
>
> I can imagine that we just have these:
>
> new P0, .Class # plain form
> new P0, .Class,
> new P0, [class],
Is a PMC (Hash) or a list of named arguments? Creating a Hash
Am Dienstag, 10. Oktober 2006 20:41 schrieb chromatic:
> Hi all,
>
> Here's an experiment I worked on yesterday to make creating objects a
> little easier from PIR.
For reference:
Subject: PMC and object creation
http://groups.google.de/group/perl.perl6.internals/browse_frm/thread/e68dc0a0a96585b7
Hi all,
Here's an experiment I worked on yesterday to make creating objects a little
easier from PIR. The MakeObject library allows you to create an object by
passing its name (or, more usefully, a Key PMC) and a set of named arguments
to the initializer.
It then calls the class's BUILDALL()
On Oct 10, 2006, at 11:03 AM, Paul Cochrane wrote:
I've been playing around for a while with the shebang line tests, and
it struck me that the is_script() function will return true on your
contrived example.
Yeah, I saw that and fixed it in SVN yesterday. :-) It now checks
that column == 1
Chris,
Attached are three new P::C policies for Parrot:
prohibit_shebang_warnings_arg.patch: checks for C
misplaced_shebang.patch:checks for shebang not on
first line of script
require_portable_shebang.patch:checks for non-portable shebang line
That's complete
Chris,
This one is still a false negative on "#!perl -Tw" and is a false positive
on "package main; #!!! my co-worker provided this non-Perl-licensed code to
Parrot!!!". Yes, that's a highly contrived example. :-) But the false
positive would be avoidable by checking the line and column numbe
On Oct 10, 2006, at 3:12 AM, Paul Cochrane wrote:
* This would be a nice addition to core Perl::Critic!
Do you want me to supply a patch for Perl::Critic too, or will the
file added to Parrot suffice?
That's completely up to you. You seem to have a knack for writing
policies, so we'd lov
Hi Mehmet,
you might have run into a Garbage-Collector bug. Try
parrot --no-gc main.pir 'x' 'identifier'
I had similar problems using PGE::P6Regex. '--no-gc' helped.
Regards,
Kiwi
The same problem.
I think that I now know the problem: the grammar is not complete. I
was thinking that pgc
Hi Mehmet,
you might have run into a Garbage-Collector bug. Try
parrot --no-gc main.pir 'x' 'identifier'
I had similar problems using PGE::P6Regex. '--no-gc' helped.
Regards,
Kiwi
At 18:52 07/10/2006 -0400, Bob Rogers wrote:
From: François PERRAD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2006 08:55:34 +0200
I've tried without success to implement coroutine in language Lua . . .
Help is welcome.
François.
I am not surprised that you have had difficulty. I can
No problem with the two patch files.
Could you add the patches for the amber *.pmc ?
Attached to this email. Odd that I missed those files before...
Regards,
Paul
files affected:
languages/amber/lib/kernel/pmc/amber_character.pmc
languages/amber/lib/kernel/pmc/amber_integer.pmc
languages/amb
> To remove the deprecated C opcode does one simply remove
> the references to it in src/ops/object.ops (and other .ops files), and
> remove the function from src/ops/ops.num? Does one then move all of
> the ops numbers "up" so that there isn't a gap caused by removing the
> opcodes? Is this rel
Chris,
This one is still a false negative on "#!perl -Tw" and is a false positive
on "package main; #!!! my co-worker provided this non-Perl-licensed code to
Parrot!!!". Yes, that's a highly contrived example. :-) But the false
positive would be avoidable by checking the line and column numbe
Chris,
Thanks for your comments, I'm still trying to hone my perl abilities
and I really appreciate your feedback. I certainly need help
sometimes with my regular expressions...
A few comments:
* No, this shouldn't go into UseParrotCoda. Separately enabled
policies are more flexible.
Actua
17 matches
Mail list logo
