RE: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!)

Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk

Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!)

At 04:25 PM 5/29/2001 -0400, Uri Guttman wrote: > >>>>> "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > DS> If someone can make a compelling argument for details on how the > DS> registers should be done that should be visible to the

Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!)

At 03:26 PM 5/29/2001 -0700, Larry Wall wrote: >Dan Sugalski writes: >: Nah, bytecode'll have an endianness marker at the top. If you load in >: bytecode with the wrong endianness, the loader will have to swap for you. > >Er. If they're not bytes, we can't call it

Re: PDD 2nd go: Conventions and Guidelines for Perl Source Code

At 03:35 PM 5/29/2001 -0700, Larry Wall wrote: >Dan Sugalski writes: >: 1) The indentation should be all tabs or all spaces. No mix, it's a pain. > >This will devolve into an editor war, and I don't think it's a real issue. Nope, the text editors aren't at all th

Re: PDD 2nd go: Conventions and Guidelines for Perl Source Code

a consistent style gives a big enough benefit that it's worth the potential discomfort it might cause individuals. Dan ------"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski

Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!)

eal overriding performance reason to have the specials in the register set. Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk

Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!)

At 09:35 AM 5/30/2001 -0700, Larry Wall wrote: >Dan Sugalski writes: >: Right, but in this case we have the advantage of tailoring the instruction >: set to the language, and given the overhead inherent in op dispatch we also >: have an incentive to hoist opcodes up to as high a lev

RE: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!)

omed to be slower than locals, especailly >considering the synchronization overhead associated with threading. We still may have synchronization issues with threads and lexicals, but likely far less than with globals. Dan -

Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!)

for something like that if it's to be used in perl 6, but that's a separate issue) Dan ------"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski eve

Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!)

At 11:24 AM 6/4/2001 -0700, Larry Wall wrote: >Dan Sugalski writes: >: Are you speaking of the nodes in regnode.h? I hadn't considered them as >: regular perl opcodes--I figured they'd stay internal to the regex engine so >: we could keep it reasonably modular. > >I d

Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!)

-"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk

Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!)

At 03:08 PM 6/4/2001 -0500, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote: >On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 03:43:43PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > At 08:34 PM 6/4/2001 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote: > > >On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 02:26:26PM -0500, David L. Nicol wrote: > > > > Does anyone have on-

Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!)

At 11:46 AM 6/1/2001 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >On Tue, May 29, 2001 at 06:20:40PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > > > I really think we'll win if we have support for at least integers as well > > as PMCs. There's potentially a lot of integer work that'

Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!)

as we reduce the constant costs. Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk

Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism?

ther than a full rebuild) Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk

Re: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism?

Dan ------"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk

RE: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism?

rsions of "A", so we could represent the different ways it was drawn in various illuminated manuscripts. That seems rather excessive. Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk

Re: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism?

) Have they changed that again? Last I checked, UTF-8 was capped at 4 bytes, but that's in the Unicode 3.0 standard. Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk

Re: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism?

At 03:21 PM 6/5/2001 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: >Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > At 12:40 PM 6/5/2001 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > >> (As an aside, UTF-8 also is not an X-byte encoding; UTF-8 is a variable > >> byte encoding, with each characte

Re: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism?

At 04:44 PM 6/5/2001 -0700, Larry Wall wrote: >Dan Sugalski writes: >: Have they changed that again? Last I checked, UTF-8 was capped at 4 bytes, >: but that's in the Unicode 3.0 standard. > >Doesn't really matter where they install the artificial cap, because >for p

Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!)

ould also require telling the compiler how to emit those opcodes. (Which folks writing python/ruby/rebol/cobol/fortran front ends for the interpreter might do) Dan ------"it's like this"--- Dan

Re: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism?

At 06:59 PM 6/5/2001 -0700, Larry Wall wrote: >Dan Sugalski writes: >: At 04:44 PM 6/5/2001 -0700, Larry Wall wrote: >: >(Perl 5 extends it all the way to 64-bit values, represented in 13 bytes!) >: >: I know we can, but is it really a good idea? 32 bits is really stretching &

Re: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism?

At 05:20 PM 6/7/2001 +, Nick Ing-Simmons wrote: >Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >It does bring up a deeper issue, however. Unicode is, at the moment, > >apparently inadequate to represent at least some part of the asian > >languages. Are th

Re: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism?

At 10:41 PM 6/7/2001 -0400, Buddha Buck wrote: >Nick Ing-Simmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > >It does bring up a deeper issue, however. Unicode is, at the moment, > > >apparently inad

RE: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism?

At 05:35 PM 6/7/2001 +, Nick Ing-Simmons wrote: >Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >I think I'd agree there. Different versions of a glyph are more a matter of > >art and handwriting styles, and that's not really something we ought to get >

RE: Unicode sorting...

7;m going to take a miss on trying to wedge an example in here, as I've a hard enough time getting letters with umlauts in) Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski

More character matching bits

hinking in particular of the Katakana/Hiragana bits of japanese, but other languages may have the same concepts. Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even

Re: More character matching bits

At 01:05 PM 6/11/2001 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: >Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Should perl's regexes and other character comparison bits have an option > > to consider different characters for the same thing as identical beasts? > > I'

Re: More character matching bits

At 04:46 PM 6/11/2001 -0400, Buddha Buck wrote: >At 01:14 PM 06-11-2001 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: >>Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> > At 01:05 PM 6/11/2001 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: >> >> Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>

Re: More character matching bits

to allow or not allow this sort of thing. Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even

Should the op dispatch loop decode?

Dan ------"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk

Re: More character matching bits

At 03:12 PM 6/11/2001 -0700, Damien Neil wrote: >On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 05:03:26PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > I don't think just /i should do that, as it seems rather extreme. (If you > > took that argument, it would seem to follow that KATAKANA LETTER A matches > &

Re: Should the op dispatch loop decode?

At 01:13 PM 6/13/2001 +0200, Bart Lateur wrote: >On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 18:12:35 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > >'Kay, here's a question to ponder. Should the op dispatch loop handle > >argument decoding, or should that be left to the opcode functions? > >Are

Re: should vtables be vtables?

--"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk

Re: More character matching bits

;re placing far too heavy an emphasis on one particular encoding and locale. If things work out well, even ASCII will be optional. Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski

Re: Should the op dispatch loop decode?

At 03:40 PM 6/12/2001 -0700, Damien Neil wrote: >On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 06:12:35PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > At the moment I'm leaning towards the functions doing their own decoding, > > as it seems likely to be faster. (Though we'd be duplicating the decoding

Re: should vtables be vtables?

At 02:40 PM 6/13/2001 +0100, Dave Mitchell wrote: >Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > At 12:00 PM 6/13/2001 +0100, Dave Mitchell wrote: > > >should we abandon vtables (ie arrays of fn pointers indexed by op), > > >and just have a single hander functio

Re: More character matching bits

At 01:10 PM 6/14/2001 +0200, Bart Lateur wrote: >On Wed, 13 Jun 2001 13:39:16 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > >> > Something that should be part of the core? I'll leave > >> >that for you to decide. > >> > >>Most definitely NOT. > > &g

Re: Should the op dispatch loop decode?

t rather than indirect parameters at least some of the time. I'm not planning on having user code call into perl opcode functions. Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk

Re: Should the op dispatch loop decode?

monadic in perl 6. Granted that one parameter will be a pointer to a list, but still... a single parameter. Dan ------"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski

A quick sketch of the interpreter

hat are dynamically allocated, referred to by name, or in the constant section. =back Dan ------"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL

Re: A quick sketch of the interpreter

At 11:45 PM 6/14/2001 -0400, Bryan C. Warnock wrote: >A couple questions, if I may? > >On Thursday 14 June 2001 05:57 pm, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > =item state stack > > > > For the interpreter's internal state > >Does this include the call stack? If it doe

Re: More character matching bits

At 06:52 AM 6/15/2001 -0400, Bryan C. Warnock wrote: >On Thursday 14 June 2001 12:01 pm, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > As I see it, locales specify: > > > >* Collating order > >* Comparison/equality specification > >* Unicode codepoint interpretation > &g

Re: A quick sketch of the interpreter

At 01:33 PM 6/15/2001 -0700, Benjamin Stuhl wrote: >--- Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > =head1 Stacks >[snip] > > The stacks are at least: > > > > =over 4 > > > > =item Temp stack > > > > for squirreling away the c

Re: More character matching bits

At 11:28 PM 6/15/2001 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote: >On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 11:50:49AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > Unless I'm missing something (Simon? Hong?) Japanese (and potentially all > > the languages that use the Han characters) can interpret a particular > > ch

Re: More character matching bits

At 12:29 AM 6/16/2001 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote: >On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 07:12:45PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > The question, then, is should ya be considered a literal number in either > > of those contexts? > >The phrase "in those contexts" suggests that it s

Re: More character matching bits

At 12:03 AM 6/16/2001 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote: >On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 06:58:24PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > The kanji dictionary I have handy gives non-numeric translations for > > several of the numeric kanji, though it might be something that gets lost > > in t

The internal string API

se, but it doesn't hurt to get things set up front. Dan ----------"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk

Re: The internal string API

ng rather naive here, huh? Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk

RE: The internal string API

implementations hide all the gory details. Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk

Re: The internal string API

ord than 'locale'. >But a locale is a collection of user preferences. How I want >my dates to be formatted, how I want my strings to be sorted. Ah. That's a separate problem. (Related, but separate) We can deal with that in a different way, I think. I'm not sure which way

Re: The internal string API

At 04:08 PM 6/19/2001 -0500, David L. Nicol wrote: >Dan Sugalski wrote: > > Hong Zhang wrote: > > > > > I don't see the core should support language/locale in this detail. > > > I deal a lot of mix chinese/english text file. There is no way to > represen

RE: The internal string API

ait for Larry to weigh in with a yea or nay, but I'm up for it. Dan ------"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk

Re: The internal string API

turn a length in (UTF8) characters. Hassle Damian about it--I expect he's got a proposal for this already. (Granted you might have to program in Klingon to get it... :) Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk

Re: The internal string API

#x27;s like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk

RE: The internal string API

l to save space with copies of constant strings, I think it'd be silly to not implement a COW scheme for perl 6. Dan ------"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski

Re: The internal string API

ts own hooks for meta data and could use "the" string API. What sort of things would Tk need? Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk

Re: ~ for concat / negation (Re: The Perl 6 Emulator)

ue. :) Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk

Re: The internal string API

d yes, I know we could just make people hand-format and stick in sort subs, but bleah. Too much work on the part of a perl programmer. Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk

PDD 4, version 1.2.

RRENT Maintainer: Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Class: Internals PDD Number: 4 Version: 1.2 Status: Developing Last Modified: 02 July 2001 PDD Format: 1 Language: English =head2 HISTORY =over 4 =item Version 1.2, 2 July 2001 =item Version 1.1, 2 March

Re: PDD 4, version 1.2.

mix of names with and >without underscores. And it means no shift key needed. Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: PDD 4, version 1.2.

At 02:48 PM 7/2/2001 -0400, Uri Guttman wrote: > >>>>> "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [Typos and dropped phrases snipped] Fixed, thanks. >what about starting offset? that is used now to shorten a string from >the l

Re: PDD 4, version 1.2.

At 08:36 PM 7/2/2001 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote: >On Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 03:00:54PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > >what about starting offset? that is used now to shorten a string from > > >the left side. > > > > D'oh! In. Out goes the unused. > >Whoa

Re: PDD 4, version 1.2.

At 09:07 PM 7/2/2001 +0100, Graham Barr wrote: >On Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 03:52:34PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > At 08:36 PM 7/2/2001 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote: > > >On Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 03:00:54PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > > > >what about starting offs

Re: PDD 4, version 1.2.

At 09:19 PM 7/2/2001 +0100, Graham Barr wrote: >On Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 04:12:31PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > At 09:07 PM 7/2/2001 +0100, Graham Barr wrote: > > >On Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 03:52:34PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > > > At 08:36 PM 7/2/2001 +0100, S

Re: PDD 4, version 1.2.

At 06:16 PM 7/2/2001 -0400, Uri Guttman wrote: > >>>>> "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > DS> At 09:07 PM 7/2/2001 +0100, Graham Barr wrote: > >> I for one use s/^...// quite often in the knowledge that it is > optimize

Re: PDD 4, version 1.2.

At 10:15 AM 7/3/2001 -0400, Uri Guttman wrote: > >>>>> "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > DS> We're going to use a copying collector. When the string gets > DS> copied as part of a compaction run things'll get cle

Re: PDD 4, version 1.2.

At 03:18 PM 7/3/2001 +0100, Graham Barr wrote: >On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 10:15:02AM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote: > > >>>>> "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > DS> We're going to use a copying collector. When the string

Any other comments on PDD 4?

If not, I'll post the version with the edits I've got and be done with it. Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: PDD 4, version 1.2.

, only different Chapter 7: Same as chapter 6, only different Chapter 8: Same as chapter 7, only different . . . Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski

Re: new event loop

t;it to write Palm apps too. (Perl6 for the TI-89, anyone?) VMS is actually easy here--it has a sane async I/O system to build on. It's the various Unices that are a pain. Dan --"it's like this"---

PDD 4, v1.3 Perl's internal data types (Final version)

'Kay, here's the final version of this. Cut here =head1 TITLE Perl's internal data types =head1 VERSION 1.3 =head2 CURRENT Maintainer: Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Class: Internals PDD Number

Re: Between-Opcode Callbacks

... (As long as you don't mind that it doesn't necessarily happen in a truly compiled version of your program) Dan ------"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski

Re: PDD 4, v1.3 Perl's internal data types (Final version)

At 07:10 PM 7/5/2001 -0400, Bryan C. Warnock wrote: >On Thursday 05 July 2001 02:11 pm, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > =begin question > > > > Should we scrap the buffer pointer and just tack the buffer on the end > > of the structure? Saves a level of indirection, but means

Re: PDD 4, v1.3 Perl's internal data types (Final version)

I can see doing it all in decimal rather than binary, but I can't think of a processor newer than the 6502 that does BCD math. (Well, OK, I think the System/3x0 processors do--I suppose that counts)) Dan ------

Re: -g vs. -O

e) Yes, I know it's wordier, but the above can be abbreviated to: -o=(5,in) -a=(nosub,notype) which isn't bad at all. Dan --"it's like this"

Re: -g vs. -O

the keystroke savings. Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk

Re: Between-Opcode Callbacks

At 11:44 AM 7/6/2001 -0500, David M. Lloyd wrote: >On Fri, 6 Jul 2001, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > > At 01:26 PM 7/5/2001 -0500, David M. Lloyd wrote: > > > > >It would be nice to be able to tell the interpreter to call a user-defined > > >C function between op

Re: -g vs. -O

t your method cache) Or just add in new variables? (Which makes compile time validation of variable interpolation in strings, or "used only once" errors, kinda wrong) Dan --"it's like this"---

Re: -g vs. -O

At 01:59 PM 7/6/2001 -0500, David L. Nicol wrote: >Dan Sugalski wrote: > > > > At 12:51 PM 7/6/2001 -0500, David L. Nicol wrote: > > >Benjamin Stuhl wrote: > > > > > > > (eg. I solemnly swear to never use symbolic > > > >

Re: Lexically scoped optimization hints

At 02:38 PM 7/6/2001 -0500, David L. Nicol wrote: >Dan Sugalski wrote: > > > > At 01:59 PM 7/6/2001 -0500, David L. Nicol wrote: > > in-code pragmata instead of compiler switches? > > > > Lexically scoped optimization hints seem like rather a tricky thing to deal

Re: Between-Opcode Callbacks

lks at the office brought something up recently that lent itself well to end of block actions. I can't recall offhand what it was, but it would've been nifty if perl could have done it reliably) Dan ----------"it&#x

Re: Between-Opcode Callbacks

At 02:23 PM 7/7/2001 -0500, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote: >On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:07:52PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > At 01:00 PM 7/7/2001 -0500, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote: > > >Would it make sense / be useful to have also distinct "between > > >statements&

Re: Between-Opcode Callbacks

worth it I think. Dan ------"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk

Re: Between-Opcode Callbacks

those callbacks be attached without op codes to do >the callback? :) You override the opcode function and push your function on top of the stack. :) Dan ------"it's like this"--

Re: Between-Opcode Callbacks

ed when lexical scopes begin or end, as well as when statements end. The "end of X" functionality will be done by piggybacking on these opcodes. Whether the opcodes themselves check flags, or we just override the opcode functions when needed (flags sound better since we can lexically scope

Re: Between-Opcode Callbacks

At 03:30 PM 7/9/2001 -0400, Uri Guttman wrote: > >>>>> "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > PJ> Done by what? Adding opcodes at all conceivable positions could > PJ> be unnecessarily expensive for most applications, and you're

Re: Between-Opcode Callbacks

At 12:02 AM 7/10/2001 +0200, Paul Johnson wrote: >On Mon, Jul 09, 2001 at 04:30:08PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > At 03:30 PM 7/9/2001 -0400, Uri Guttman wrote: > > >definitely insert special opcodes only when asked for by a compiler > > >option. stuff like profi

Re: Between-Opcode Callbacks

At 10:21 PM 7/10/2001 -0400, Uri Guttman wrote: > >>>>> "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > DS> At 12:02 AM 7/10/2001 +0200, Paul Johnson wrote: > > >> And ultimately it's going to be possible to directly manipula

PDD5: opcode function specs

tream) Cut here--- =head1 TITLE Opcode Function specs =head1 VERSION 1.0 =head2 CURRENT Maintainer: Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Class: Internals PDD Number: 5 Version: 1.0 Status: Developing Last Modified: 16 Jul 2001 PDD Format: 1 Language: Eng

Re: op code bof schedule

Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk

Re: new op code bof time?

ore interested in the internals, it should be worth a drop-in) Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: op code bof

yet, an easel with a pad of paper. Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk

Re: op code bof

At 01:30 PM 7/19/2001 -0400, Uri Guttman wrote: > >>>>> "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > DS> We'll find a room, never fear. Lunch wednesday is still the best > DS> time, I think. > >fine. is gathering first

Re: op code bof

At 07:51 PM 7/19/2001 +0200, Paul Johnson wrote: >On Thu, Jul 19, 2001 at 01:40:50PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > > > Sure, sounds good. I'll see about having the first draft of the "Parrot > > Assembly Language Manual and Architecture Handbook" PDD with me

Re: Modules, Versioning, and Beyond

$CORE$1.02, say, it'll also be seen as plain IO. (Which one gets exported this way when multiple modules are used is rather up in the air. I don't have the answer at the moment. Dan --"it'

Re: Modules, Versioning, and Beyond

At 10:32 PM 7/30/2001 -0400, Sam Tregar wrote: >On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > > When you actually use a module, the simple name (like IO) will be > > internally expanded out to the three value thing. So if you have two > > modules that each use a diffe

Re: Modules, Versioning, and Beyond

h, there's no way to get around this for external libraries that we link against if they don't do similar things. Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugal

Re: Opcode Dispatch

ugh a perl filter at some point in its life...) Dan ------"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk

Draft assembly PDD

Dan --"it's like this"------- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >