Re: [TODO] document (pdd19) or deprecate .get_results directive

On Dec 5, 7:29 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Patrick R . Michaud) wrote: > # New Ticket Created by Patrick R. Michaud > # Please include the string: [perl #48152] > # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. > # http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=48152> > > Many exce

parrot ops: what's an op?

Hi, Is it possible for parrot embedders to find out whether a certain name is an op? IMCC uses a function "is_op", but it's poking in the Parrot_Interp structure. The pir compiler must be able to check which names are ops and which are not. My goal is to embed a Parrot_Interp in compilers/pirc/n

Re: [DOCS] NCI

On Nov 26, 7:42 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Will Coleda) wrote: > # New Ticket Created by Will Coleda > # Please include the string: [perl #47826] > # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. > # http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=47826> > > The NCI information in

Re: Thanksgiving fun

On Nov 23, 1:37 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I tried it on the 0.5.0 updated this week, with the following results: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] nqp]$ ../../parrot nqp.pbc ~/tmp/blue_rect.pl > Cannot find the attribute 'post' (String) that you asked for. > Method 'named' not found > current instr.: 'par

Re: [IMCC] add ".label" to lexer for macro labels

On Sep 28, 12:45 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bernhard Schmalhofer) wrote: > Klaas-Jan Stol schrieb:> hi, > > > attached a patch that adds ".label" as a directive to declare labels > > in a macro. > Applied in r21624. thanks! > > > The big overall cunning plan is to remove ".local" for this purpose > >

Re: [BUG?] main isn't in src/parrot.c

On Sep 21, 2:59 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chromatic) wrote: > On Thursday 20 September 2007 06:58:55 Paul Cochrane via RT wrote: > > > On Sat Mar 10 19:15:20 2007, coke wrote: > > > From docs/BROKEN.pod. > > > > Is this something that needs fixing? > > > > (it's in compilers/imcc/main.c) > > There is

Re: [PROPOSAL] Remove "->" syntax from IMCC

On Sep 21, 12:07 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Allison Randal) wrote: > kjs wrote: > >>> In order to keep PIR syntax clean, I propose to remove the -> syntax for > >>> method calls, as it is the same as the dot-notation. > > Also agreed. Get it into DEPRECATED.pod now so we can remove it after > the next