On Sun Jun 01 01:33:10 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Thursday 29 May 2008 06:21:03 Will Coleda wrote:
>
> > While this may have served a pedagogical purpose some time ago*,
> it's
> > better left in the docs as an example of what not to do (and that
> even
> > if core parrot is safe, we need
On Thursday 29 May 2008 06:21:03 Will Coleda wrote:
> While this may have served a pedagogical purpose some time ago*, it's
> better left in the docs as an example of what not to do (and that even
> if core parrot is safe, we need to be careful of dynamically loaded
> opcodes! They're not safe!),
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 10:25:17AM -0700, chromatic wrote:
> On Thursday 29 May 2008 08:45:26 Will Coleda wrote:
>
> > Even if there is disagreement on whether the opcode itself should be
> > removed, there appears to be consensus that the tests need to be
> > removed. We can always do that first
On Thursday 29 May 2008 08:45:26 Will Coleda wrote:
> Even if there is disagreement on whether the opcode itself should be
> removed, there appears to be consensus that the tests need to be
> removed. We can always do that first to deal with the tickets relating
> to that, and then discuss the mer
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 9:21 AM, via RT Will Coleda
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> # New Ticket Created by Will Coleda
> # Please include the string: [perl #55040]
> # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
> # http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=55040 >
>
>
>
# New Ticket Created by Will Coleda
# Please include the string: [perl #55040]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=55040 >
While this may have served a pedagogical purpose some time ago*, it's
better left in the
