Bob Rogers wrote:
Out of the possible hacks we could do, I'd rather go for the hack of
providing a way to create a new RetContinuation from within the C code
(even if it's a special kind of return continuation with the same
interface, but a different set of internal actions to sat
Jonathan Worthington wrote:
This is a good place to start, but I agree it's not what we want
ultimately. Chip and I talked about attaching a data structure of
vtable entries as a property on the namespace object.
I implemented this to test it out and it kinda worked. However,
properties don't
Using either of those flags ( PObj_private0_FLAG or PObj_private2_FLAG
) break other tests.
I'm up for more suggestions.
Kevin
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Am Sonntag, 29. Oktober 2006 21:25 schrieb Kevin Tew:
I've had :init implemented for a couple of weeks now, but I can't check
it in becaus
Am Sonntag, 29. Oktober 2006 21:25 schrieb Kevin Tew:
> I've had :init implemented for a couple of weeks now, but I can't check
> it in because it needs its own flag.
I think I've answered that already. Again:
SUB_FLAG_CORO_FF = PObj_private0_FLAG,
SUB_FLAG_C_HANDLER = PObj_privat
Kevin Tew wrote:
I've had :init implemented for a couple of weeks now, but I can't
check it in because it needs its own flag.
SUB_FLAG_GENERATOR= PObj_private3_FLAG, /* unused old python
pmcs */
Have you tried this one? It's labeled unused, and I find no references
to it at all in sr
I've had :init implemented for a couple of weeks now, but I can't check
it in because it needs its own flag.
Currently I'm using PObj_private7_FLAG to indicate a :init sub, but I
stole PObj_private7_FLAG from SUB_FLAG_PF_POSTCOMP.
Leo suggested using PObj_private2_FLAG, but when I did tons of tes
Author: jonathan
Date: Sun Oct 29 12:21:25 2006
New Revision: 15051
Modified:
trunk/docs/pdds/clip/pdd15_objects.pod
Log:
Add a note on constructors to the Objects requirements.
Modified: trunk/docs/pdds/clip/pdd15_objects.pod
==
chromatic wrote:
On Sunday 29 October 2006 08:25, Jonathan Worthington wrote:
It'd be nice to actually attach these methods to a v-table itself
somehow. However, unless we make classes a compile-time construct rather than
"turning a namespace into a class" using newclass as we do now, I don'
On Sunday 29 October 2006 08:25, Jonathan Worthington wrote:
> It'd be nice to actually attach these methods to a v-table itself
> somehow. However, unless we make classes a compile-time construct rather
> than "turning a namespace into a class" using newclass as we do now, I
> don't see how this
From: Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2006 22:50:57 -0700
Bob Rogers wrote:
>Almost two weeks ago, I had what I thought was a clever idea for
> eliminating the continuation barrier from action invocation: Simply
> call the action using the original cont
Allison Randal wrote:
Updating Punie went smoothly, but when I updated TGE::Rule:
-.sub __init :method
+.sub 'init' :method :anon :vtable
I got this error:
../../parrot -o TGE/Rule.pbc --output-pbc TGE/Rule.pir
error:imcc:'init' is not a v-table method, but was used with :vtable.
in f
Jonathan Worthington wrote:
Hi,
As of r15039, :vtable and :vtable("...") are now both implemented.
See example code at the end of this email.
Awesome!
As of now, please use this new syntax. I have left in support for the
old "__"-prefix lookup as plenty of old code is using it; please
note
12 matches
Mail list logo
