Looks like we've got a slew of gcc3 issues (which don't show up on the
tinderboxes, cause nobody's running a gcc3 box.)
rspier@bear ~/projects/parrot$ make test
perl t/harness
t/op/basic..ok
t/op/bitwiseok
t/op/debuginfo..ok
t/op/hacks..ok
t/op/ifunless...ok
t
At 5:35 PM -0400 4/13/02, Clinton A. Pierce wrote:
>I'm fighting a now-you-see-it now-you-don't kind of bug and I was
>wondering if there's a way to completely turn off garbage collection
>and memory re-use for debugging?
Yes. The sweepoff and collectoff ops will turn of DOD runs and GC
sweeps
Hopefully that'll get your attention.
In the interests of accomplishing something this millennium, I'm
planning to tag version 0.0.5 at some time around 12:01am EST Monday,
April 15. I'll be watching mail up until the deadline, so if nobody
complains, Monday evening I'll run the test suites and i
On Sat, Apr 13, 2002 at 08:53:41AM -0700, Glenn Linderman wrote:
>
> Off hand, it seems like defaulting to "is dynamic_topic" would make
> more of those common useful $_-dependent subroutines work without
> change, but I guess if the perl 5 to 6 translator can detect use of $_
> before definition
Rich Morin writes:
: Some while back, I asked the Perk5-porters whether there were any
: parts of Perl that could benefit from vector processors (e.g., the
: G4 Velocity Engine). The consensus of the respondents ranged from
: "probably not" to "I don't want to think about it".
Well, Perl 5 doesn
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: Dave Mitchell wrote:
:
: > The top 20 'my $var' declarations in .pm files in the bleedperl
: > distribution:
:
: How *dare* you introduce hard data into this discussion!
: Next you'll be wanting to deal in actual facts rather than personal
: opinion and sheer guesses
Clinton A. Pierce wrote:
> I'm fighting a now-you-see-it now-you-don't kind of bug and I was
wondering
> if there's a way to completely turn off garbage collection and memory
> re-use for debugging?
The defined procedures for doing this are not currently implemented.
The simplest way for now is p
On Sat, 13 Apr 2002, Tom Hughes wrote:
# Well that is what perl 5 does certainly.
cool I didnt know that! (I've never pondered perl5 internals)
# decided not to do that in perl 6 though due to issues about what
# it meant to nul terminate in various different character sets.
# We can't assume t
I'm fighting a now-you-see-it now-you-don't kind of bug and I was wondering
if there's a way to completely turn off garbage collection and memory
re-use for debugging?
My problems vanish when seemingly insignificant things happen, and
re-appear again later. For example, I'll take a line of te
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Roman Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> why dont we default to null terminating strings of type native?
> if "native" is what we get when LANG=C it only seems natural to do so.
> else we are forced to use wrapper functions a that grow and manipulate
> stri
why dont we default to null terminating strings of type native?
if "native" is what we get when LANG=C it only seems natural to do so.
else we are forced to use wrapper functions a that grow and manipulate
string data any time we need to pass it to standard C functions that
wont accept a string_l
> There'd be an interaction between is topic_preserving, default parameter
> values, and explicit parameter values which should be clarified. Now I
> understand why someone suggested using //= $_ instead of is
> topic_preserving, somewhere along the line. Clearly if the user
> supplies the par
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 12:28:33PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 4:54 AM -0400 4/9/02, Michel J Lambert wrote:
> Right. A good spot for it is in either explicit DOD request ops, or
> we require it as one of the ops run at block exit or something. We
> may do a sweep when an exception's trigge
On Sat, Apr 13, 2002 at 12:51:06AM -0700, Ashley Winters wrote:
> Perl today: A semicolon is required after every statement, except before a
> closing curly or end of file.
> Perl 6: A semicolon is also required after every block, except when the
> closing curly is on a line of its own, or it prec
Allison Randal wrote:
> What if $_ were dynamically scoped, but only for subroutines? Dynamic
> scoping is not necessarily the same thing as a global $_. It would
> merely pretend (only for $_) that the subroutine had been defined in the
> scope where it was evaluated. But that could get you into
On 04/12/02 Dan Sugalski wrote:
> FWIW, the numbers were:
>
> No JIT: Parrot 866 gen/sec Mono 11 gen/sec
>JIT: Parrot 1068 gen/sec Mono 114 gen/sec
Interesting data: was this taken a while ago?
I get different ratios on my machine (PIII 1.1):
Parrot JIT: 850 (though the output
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 05:34:13PM -0700, Glenn Linderman wrote:
> Allison Randal wrote:
> > > In a message dated Fri, 12 Apr 2002, Glenn Linderman writes:
> > > > $_ becomes lexical
>
> > Sound logic. And it almost did go that way. But subs that access the
> > current $_ directly are far too com
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Tom Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Syscall param open(pathname) contains uninitialised or unaddressable byte(s)
> at 0x403F1892: __libc_open (__libc_open:31)
> by 0x403829C3: _IO_fopen@@GLIBC_2.1 (iofopen.c:67)
> by 0x809B287: cg_core
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Steve Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +Stability
> +-
> +Purify and other memory badness detectors
One thing that may be useful here is valgrind, which can be found
at http://developer.kde.org/~sewardj/ and does Purify types things
on linux.
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 04:42:07PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > >
> > > Why isn't
> > >
> > > if %foo {"key"} {print "Hello 1"}
> > >
> > > equivalent with the perl5 syntax:
> > >
> > > if (%foo) {"key
20 matches
Mail list logo
