cool, just ask me then :-) as I said it's get_int_value and a jitframe
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 1:36 PM, David Edelsohn <[email protected]> wrote: > Maciej, > > We are not tracking history one by one. We are trying to fix test > runner failures. And the current failure is a missing reference to > fail_boxes_int. It is not obvious what replaced it by looking at the > current sources, so we are trying to investigate back to the source of > the change. > > Thanks, David > > On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 4:49 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi David. >> >> Why are you tracking the history one by one? The fail_boxes_int etc. >> is now living on a jitframe. There are direct tests for all of that, I >> would suggest looking at those instead of history (so it's now called >> get_int_value and accepts a jitframe) >> >> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 2:55 AM, David Edelsohn <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hi, David >>> >>> Ivan and Andre from Unicamp and I are trying to update the ppc backend >>> to the current RPython internals API. >>> >>> We're trying to understand the removal of fail_boxes_int, etc. from >>> the backends. It looks like this was done on the remove-globals-in-jit >>> branch. I guess we need to adapt all of that branch and all of >>> jitframe-in-heap branch to PPC. >>> >>> Can you help explain a little more about this patch? >>> >>> https://mail.python.org/pipermail/pypy-commit/2013-January/069022.html >>> >>> Thanks, David >>> _______________________________________________ >>> pypy-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev _______________________________________________ pypy-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
