untested ops

I've added a lot of missing tests to the test suite which has improved coverage. We now have 205 tests which ought to run. use $(PERL) in Makefiles Oh, and Windows is ON FIRE! The following ops do not yet have tests: close_i close_ic err_i err_s open_i_s open_i_sc open_i_s_i open_i_sc_i open_

Re: Any last requests?

On Tue, Dec 11, 2001 at 02:10:45PM -0500, Gregor N. Purdy wrote: > > mkdir lib > > mv Parrot Test lib > > (with the appropriate MANIFEST corrections and CVS incantations) > If this counts as a motion, I second the motion, assuming that > counts. *nodnod*. Do it. Or I'll do it in the morni

Re: gc object destruction

just to make a point what you are talking about is not destruction (as in c++) but finalization (as in any gced language) the difference being in the determinism. Destruction is almost always necessary in c++ since the memory allocated need to be deallocated. Like you justly specify finalization

Re: Any last requests?

All -- > I suspect the fix is to > > mkdir lib > mv Parrot Test lib > > (with the appropriate MANIFEST corrections and CVS incantations) If this counts as a motion, I second the motion, assuming that counts. Regards, -- Gregor __

Parrot 0.0.3 is released

A great crowd of people were standing all round the Stone Table and though the moon was shining many of them carried torches which burned with evil-looking red flames and black smoke. But such people! Ogres with monstrous teeth, and wolves, and bull-headed men; spirits of evil

Default blocksize

On most UNIX flavors I can use the stat() system call and the {struct stat}.st_blksize member to get an idea of the blocksize of a regular file. I don't currently have access to anything but Linux, Solaris and AIX to check this one, and I'm especially not sure about VMS, but for now I'm using thi

Re: Any last requests?

In perl.perl6.internals, you wrote: >Unless I hear howls of pain to the contrary, Parrot 0.0.3 will be >released in the next few hours. So if there's anything life-threatening >that needs changing, let me know now. > >Oh, and I renamed test_prog, to see who's watching. Anyone on a Case-insensitiv

Re: mem_allocate_aligned

At 08:40 AM 12/11/2001 +, Jonathan Stowe wrote: >On Mon, 10 Dec 2001, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > > > We need an "allocate zeroed" call too. We can get zeroed pages faster in > > some cases than we can allocate pages and zero them ourselves. > > > >Isn't that calloc() ? Yep, if we're using the ma

Re: Just-in-Time Predereferencing Patch

Simon -- > I haven't tried this, so feel free to shoot me down, but is your 22% > speed-up based on an unpatched Parrot, or a patched Parrot without the > -P flag? I'm trying to work out whether or not this patch actually slows > down the general case, which wouldn't be pleasant. Based on patche

Re: Just-in-Time Predereferencing Patch

On Tue, Dec 11, 2001 at 10:09:07AM -0500, Gregor N. Purdy wrote: > -runops_generic(core, interpreter, pc); > +if ((interpreter->flags & PARROT_PREDEREF_FLAG) != 0) { > + size_t offset = pc - (opcode_t *)interpreter->code->byte_code; > + > + if (!interpreter->prede

Just-in-Time Predereferencing Patch

All -- I am attaching a .patch file that contains the patch, and a .txt file that describes the patch. Have fun, but be sure you are home by 11. Regards, -- Gregor _ /Inspiration >> Innovation >> Excellence (TM)

Re: mem_allocate_aligned

On Mon, 10 Dec 2001, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > We need an "allocate zeroed" call too. We can get zeroed pages faster in > some cases than we can allocate pages and zero them ourselves. > Isn't that calloc() ? /J\ -- Jonathan Stowe | |