James deBoer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[ to OP ]
> This patch will test to see if perldoc actually works, aborting the
> configuration if it does not.
Can you convert that test to produce a fat warning and skip targets
relying on perldoc?
Thanks,
leo
Thursday, November 11, 2004, 5:42:29 PM, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> Or something like that.
[snip]
FWIW, I really like the idea.
Will there be a data type for "characters," or are those just strings
with a single grapheme?
As a side note, the Java people decided for UTF-16 Unicode "char"s,
and some
Matt Fowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jeff~
> Yes, but in the case of the continuation resuming after foo, the
> continuation should restore the frame to the point where it was taken.
> Thus all of the registers will be exactly as they were when the
> continuation was taken (i.e. in the correc
This adds information about the result of a test if the information is
terse enough. i.e. changes:
Determining whether your cc is actually gcc...done.
Into:
Determining whether your cc is actually gccyes.
Enjoy,
Luke
Index: config/auto/aio.pl
===
# New Ticket Created by Bernhard Schmalhofer
# Please include the string: [perl #32434]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org:80/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=32434 >
Hi,
this patch adds support for the String PMC to Data/Dumper/Default.imc. I
As outlined in the analysis of dumper.t failures with the new register
allocator, we have another problem with current calling or better return
conventions.
Given this simple program:
$ cat ret.imc
.sub main @MAIN
P5 = new PerlString
P5 = "ok\n"
foo()
print P5
.end
.sub foo
.
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This adds information about the result of a test if the information is
> terse enough. i.e. changes:
>
> Determining whether your cc is actually gcc...done.
>
> Into:
>
> Determining whether your cc is actually gccyes.
Thanks, applie
At 1:04 PM +0100 11/14/04, Ron Blaschke wrote:
Thursday, November 11, 2004, 5:42:29 PM, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Or something like that.
[snip]
FWIW, I really like the idea.
Will there be a data type for "characters," or are those just strings
with a single grapheme?
Strings with a single grapheme. "Ch
At 11:01 PM +0100 11/13/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Matt Fowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I get the feeling that this is equivalent to requiring exception
handlers to be a locally defined closure, which is another way we
could go about this.
Yes. That solves it. OTOH going all along with lexic
At 5:53 PM +0100 11/13/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
As the analysis of test errors of the new reigster allocator has
shown, we have a problem WRT register allocation. This problem isn't
new, but as the allocator is more efficiently reusing registers (or
reusing them in a different way) it's expose
Sam Ruby wrote:
A patch is attached, but it bears a little discussion.
Well, that didn't exactly work. I've since commmitted these patches,
and more. A the moment, all the python and pirate unit tests pass. (Woot!)
In the absense of other direction, I plan to write more tests and use
them to dri
On Nov 14, 2004, at 1:53 PM, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Since, for example, it's completely reasonable (well, likely at least)
for a called sub to rebind lexicals in its parent
What does that mean, exactly? It seems like that directly contradicts
the meaning of "lexical". For instance, see Larry's comme
PDD03: Responsibility for environment preservation
PDD03:
PDD03: The caller is responsible for preserving any environment it is interested
PDD03: in keeping. This includes any and all registers, lexical scoping and
PDD03: scratchpads, opcode libraries, and so forth.
PDD03:
PDD03: Use of the save
On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 17:03:33 -0500, Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 5:53 PM +0100 11/13/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> >As the analysis of test errors of the new reigster allocator has
> >shown, we have a problem WRT register allocation. This problem isn't
> >new, but as the allocator is
14 matches
Mail list logo
