At 6:56 PM +0100 8/12/02, Simon Cozens wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Daniel Grunblatt) writes:
>> I moved it back to pure-Perl because there were something like half of the
>> tinderboxes failing to assemble anything.
>
>Ah, right. Yeah, the tinderboxes are good slaves but really bad masters.
>
>Here's a more interesting question: which parts of Parrot are enshrined,
>and which are prototypes, ready to be thrown away? For instance, I'd
>say much of languages/* is all proof-of-concept prototype stuff; imcc
>may not be. The assembler I'd call a prototype. The regex engine? The
>GC? ...
It's all potentially prototype. When 1.0 is released the bytecode
format, opcode behaviour, and the various external interfaces will
be final, but all the rest of the code is subject to change.
--
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
