# New Ticket Created by Leopold Toetsch
# Please include the string: [perl #20597]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=20597
Next try. This patch obsoletes #20584.
- more wordsize fixes
- routine for
: -Original Message-
: From: Jonathan Sillito [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
[snip]
: 1) I was thinking of writing a couple of short how to documents aimed at
: compiler writers. Is there interest in something like this?
yes please
--cal henderson
---
** For great Emap magazine
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 06:53:25AM +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Garrett Goebel wrote:
Many thanks for the links (searching for this stuff is a pain, there are
too many results ;-)
Anyway:
- are there platforms with quad precision floats out there?
sparc Solaris and Irix both have 16
Leopold Toetsch (via RT) wrote:
# New Ticket Created by Leopold Toetsch
# Please include the string: [perl #20597]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=20597
Here is a corrected version, which handles
On 28 Jan 2003, Aaron Sherman wrote:
I'm not sure I recall the sufficient, yet irrelevant technical reasons.
I certainly can't think of anything. It also helps in the case of
objects that are non truly arrayish or hashish:
my SuperTree $foo;
$foo[Munge]; # Returns the node whose
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 12:11:18PM +1300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This may sound like a silly idea but ...
Has anyone considered removing with the syntactic distinction between
numeric and string indexing -- that is, between array and hash lookup?
PHP works this way.
In particular, it would seem that
%foo[$key]
would be just as easy for the compiler to grok as
%foo{$key}
On Mon, 27 Jan 2003 15:39:19 -0800, Damian Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sure. But then is this:
$ref[$key]
an array or hash look-up???
Yes, well I suppose that could be
John Williams wrote:
I think you are still overlooking the autovivification behavior.
i.e. What is the difference between these:
1) $a{1234567} = 1;
2) $a[1234567] = 1;
Answer: #1 creates 1 element. #2 creates 1,234,567 elements!
Not currently: 2) does
- generate a sparse hole
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 09:20:33AM +, Thomas Whateley wrote:
one more quick question.. would it be possible to play linker games
to redirect syscalls (from compiled c) to wrapper functions that check
permissions? Would that allow us to secure dynamicly linked libs??
When I said as soon
The variable layout of interpreter-code (actually the packfile) doesn't
fit very good for multiple code segments. There is only one -byte_code
pointer, the byte_code_size is in bytes and converted zig times into
opcode_t's and so on.
so:
1) rename interpreter-code to interpreter-pf (the
On Tue, 2003-01-28 at 17:12, Garrett Goebel wrote:
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
- 8/12 byte float issues are still the same - are these
formats really portable, or should we try to store
ASCII equivalents?
No?
? Because my knowledge here approaches zero, so I'm just aping
On Wed, 2003-01-29 at 04:56, Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 06:53:25AM +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Garrett Goebel wrote:
Many thanks for the links (searching for this stuff is a pain, there are
too many results ;-)
Anyway:
- are there platforms with quad precision
On Tue, 2003-01-28 at 19:24, Paul Johnson wrote:
If that's not the case, I need to get my head around why, since Perl
*does* distinguish between defined and exists.
But I wish it wouldn't for arrays. That only came about to support
pseudo-hashes which are going / have gone away.
Are
On 2003-01-29 at 09:44:27, Aaron Sherman wrote:
Yes, I would expect that. In my opinion there is no difference between
an array and a hash other than the underlying storage and the
type-management of the key.
Perhaps it is your opinion that those should be the only differences,
but the actual
On 2003-01-29 at 10:32:58, Mark J. Reed wrote:
(What their value should be is the subject of the
parallel thread on array defaults).
Whups, that would be THIS thread, actually. The sidebar on
removing the syntactic distinction between arrays and hashes
made me think I was over in the Spare
--- Sam Vilain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
=head2 includes( [ Ikeys, ] [ Ivalues ])
Where the keys and/or values are obviously junctions.
if ($container.includes(any(ant, beaver, cow, duck))(
...
This is *SO* cool.
=Austin
--- Jonathan Scott Duff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can I flame you for being too preemptive? :-)
In all honesty, I just wanted to be able to use absquatulate in a
real post. ;-)
=Austin
--- Nicholas Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 09:17:36AM -0800, Damian Conway wrote:
Errno. That's rather the whole point of Cbut properties [*].
[*] People, we just *have* to find better names for these things!
I'd suggest we henceforth call them value
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 07:46:43AM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote:
Obviously, values are pure and therefrom spring virtues, while
objects are but vile clay -- fallible constructs of a sinful man,
pathetically trying to recreate an envisioned ideal. Ergo, they have
naught but vices.
Can I get
--- Nicholas Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 07:46:43AM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote:
Obviously, values are pure and therefrom spring virtues, while
objects are but vile clay -- fallible constructs of a sinful man,
pathetically trying to recreate an envisioned ideal.
On Jan-29, Jonathan Sillito wrote:
1) coroutine.t (which should be put in t/pmc/) exposes some errors in our
coroutine code.
2) coroutine.patch fixes those errors by saving and restoring more of the
coroutine's context. More specifically the user_stack, control_stack and
pad_stack.
3)
Also I can't work out how to search the list archive at develooper.com.
Patches welcome.
(Really. I have several archive management tasks that need to get
done, and if anyone wants to volunteer)
-R
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 07:36:07AM -0800, Robert Spier wrote:
Also I can't work out how to search the list archive at develooper.com.
Patches welcome.
(Really. I have several archive management tasks that need to get
done, and if anyone wants to volunteer)
I'm quite happy to search
At 1:15 PM +0100 1/28/03, K Stol wrote:
Hi there,
didn't have time to reply earlier, had to do some research on Lua and had to
get approval for the project, so couldn't let you know earlier. sorry about
that.
But now, I have it (the approval, that is) so I'll be implementing a
compiler for
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Anyway:
- are there platforms with quad precision floats out there?
Several documents refer to quad precision hardware, but I can't find direct
references to any.
- or should 12 byte long doubles get converted to 8 byte IEEE doubles.
Perhaps the following quote from
Solution 1: If you attempt to SET a cell to it's 'empty value', it
will be set to it's default:
my int @a is default(5); #
@a[5] = 0;# actually sets it to it's 'empty value',
5
@a[5] = undef;# autocnv to 0, + warning, still sets to
5
my
--- Michael Lazzaro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK, I think we agree that 'default' refers to what to put in the
'holes' of an array (or hash, but that's a separate discussion.)
When
you overlay a real hash on top of your default values, the default
values show through the holes. So now
On Wednesday, January 29, 2003, at 11:02 AM, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
So you can't set something to its type's own empty value, because it
will, by definition, thereafter return it's overloaded empty value,
def.
Looks like a maintenance nightmare to me.
Agreed, it's not pretty. The
Ok, stepping back...
there are three questions:
* Can a type be undefined
* What does an array say when asked for an element that doesn't exist
* What happens when you try to undefine something
I really think you need an attribute to clarify these.
For example, you would not say:
my
On Wed, 2003-01-29 at 05:29, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
John Williams wrote:
I think you are still overlooking the autovivification behavior.
i.e. What is the difference between these:
1) $a{1234567} = 1;
2) $a[1234567] = 1;
Answer: #1 creates 1 element. #2 creates
Michael Lazzaro [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Solution 1: If you attempt to SET a cell to it's 'empty value', it
will be set to it's default:
my int @a is default(5); #
@a[5] = 0;# actually sets it to it's 'empty
value', 5
@a[5] = undef;#
--- Michael Lazzaro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday, January 29, 2003, at 11:02 AM, Jonathan Scott Duff
wrote:
So you can't set something to its type's own empty value, because
it
will, by definition, thereafter return it's overloaded empty
value,
def.
Looks like a
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 08:49:42PM +0100, Juergen Boemmels wrote:
Solution 3: The autoset sets the value to the default value.
my Int @a is default(5);
@a[3] = 3; # there are now 4 items in the array
@a[2]; # was autoset 5 so returns 5
@a[4]; #
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 11:32:53AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
On Wednesday, January 29, 2003, at 11:02 AM, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
So you can't set something to its type's own empty value, because it
will, by definition, thereafter return it's overloaded empty value,
def.
Looks
Jonathan Scott Duff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 08:49:42PM +0100, Juergen Boemmels wrote:
Solution 3: The autoset sets the value to the default value.
my Int @a is default(5);
@a[3] = 3; # there are now 4 items in the array
@a[2];
In my opinion, default values for arrays should only come into play
for array elements that have NEVER been assigned to or that have
been explicity undef'ed. If an assigment is made to an array element
then the array element should end up the assigned value (modulo
necessary type conversions) and
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 12:00:33PM -0800, Mark Biggar wrote:
In my opinion, default values for arrays should only come into play
for array elements that have NEVER been assigned to or that have
been explicity undef'ed. If an assigment is made to an array element
then the array element should
Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 12:11:18PM +1300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has anyone considered removing with the syntactic distinction
between numeric and string indexing -- that is, between array and
hash lookup?
PHP works this way.
Well, for some definition of
--- Jonathan Scott Duff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 08:49:42PM +0100, Juergen Boemmels wrote:
Solution 3: The autoset sets the value to the default value.
my Int @a is default(5);
@a[3] = 3; # there are now 4 items in the array
@a[2];
On Wed, 2003-01-29 at 14:54, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
Can someone give me a realish world example of when you would want an
array that can store both undefined values and default values and those
values are different?
my @send_partner_email is default(1);
while $websignups.getline {
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 09:44:27AM -0500, Aaron Sherman wrote:
Yes, I would expect that. In my opinion there is no difference between
an array and a hash other than the underlying storage and the
type-management of the key. I'm increasingly of the opinion that a)
there should be no @ vs %,
Stéphane Payrard wrote:
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 09:44:27AM -0500, Aaron Sherman wrote:
Yes, I would expect that. In my opinion there is no difference between
an array and a hash other than the underlying storage and the
type-management of the key. I'm increasingly of the opinion that a)
there
On Jan-29, Steve Fink wrote:
More weirdness. It gave me error messages, but claims to have
committed. Look near the end for a timestamp (which is probably ~30
seconds after the commit).
It looks like everything really did make it in, but the cvs commit
message did not include the parts that
Michael Lazzaro [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Solution 1: If you attempt to SET a cell to it's 'empty value', it
will be set to it's default:
my int @a is default(5); #
@a[5] = 0;# actually sets it to it's 'empty
value', 5
@a[5] = undef;#
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 02:37:04PM -0600, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 03:29:57PM -0500, Aaron Sherman wrote:
On Wed, 2003-01-29 at 14:54, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
Can someone give me a realish world example of when you would want an
array that can store both
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 01:54:10PM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
On Wednesday, January 29, 2003, at 12:38 PM, Smylers wrote:
That would make the rule very simple indeed:
Assigning Cundef to an array element causes that element to take
the
array's default value.
The effects
46 matches
Mail list logo
