Clinton Pierce wrote:
Sorry, the example was unnecessarily long.
After a quick reading of this, I'd have expected the value of f at the indicated point to be 1, but instead it's 2.
The dark chapters of imcc documentations and functionality are getting
revealed again ;-)
The story is like
Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Consider this Perl 6 code:
sub refinc($var) {
my $myvar = $var;
$myvar += 1;
}
If you pass an integer in here, it should do nothing. However, if you
pass an object with an overloaded += in, it should have the
side-effect of
Clinton Pierce [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah, I don't think you can use .local across subs like that. I think
.local means local to this sub and *inner subs aren't closures*. In
fact, I don't think inner subs are useful for much of anything at all.
Aside from that, I think .local should be
Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Consider this Perl 6 code:
sub refinc($var) {
my $myvar = $var;
$myvar += 1;
}
If you pass an integer in here, it should do nothing. However, if you
pass an object with an overloaded += in, it should have the
On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 07:09:26PM +0100, Fergal Daly wrote:
I just thought of a big problem with plan extensions. If the script silently
eat's itself just before you extend the plan, then you don't know that
anything went wrong.
It would have to also exit normally. That is rare.
--
Is
On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 08:39:39PM +0100, Fergal Daly wrote:
Test::NoWarnings sounds good to me. What is the correct etiquette for
abandoning a namespace? Just delete the files with PAUSE or should I leave a
pointer behind? Not too important with this module but I'm just curious,
When I
Ah, summertime (at least here in the northern hemisphere). The language list
has slowed down to a trickle, hopefully because everybody is relaxing in a
cool place, idly sipping non-alcoholic spritzers next to some special person,
reading low-brow literature (or, as in my case, Apoc 6).
This
I'd like to layout some thougts, which get quite dim, when it comes to
threads. So there are a lot of questions.
1) Exceptions
There are 3 kinds of exception sources:
- hard: e.g. SIGFPE, SIGHUP. They get catched by signal handlers[1]
- soft: internal_exception()
- user: a Craise opcode signals a
(... skipping (1) and (2) ...)
3) Threads
The underlaying model are posix threads if available. This implies
that all interpreter data are shared by default. So we'll need per
thread data: interpreter, prederef JIT code ...
Is 'the underlying model' the implementation of the OS running
- Original Message -
From: Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2003 9:34 AM
Subject: Re: Tentative [PATCH]: valclone
Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Consider this Perl 6 code:
sub refinc($var)
So, now that we're using CPS, will there be a standard way of seeing
what the call stack is (for purposes of debugging/Ccaller/c.)? Is
it just a matter of looking in P0 and then P0's P0, and so on? Or
will that croak in certain cases?
Luke
In the meantime interpreter-warns has moved to the context structure
and gets now restored for CPS subroutine calls.
But there is a slight problem (as well as with e.g. pad_stacks)
When we have:
warningson 1
newsub .Sub, .Continuation, _func, _ret
...
invoke
and _func turns warnings off,
K Stol [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(... skipping (1) and (2) ...)
3) Threads
Is 'the underlying model' the implementation of the OS running parrot (as
oppposed to a self-made system,
On Linux there are many threading libs. E.g. pth (GNU portable threads)
and pthread (POSIX threads). The latter
Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, now that we're using CPS, will there be a standard way of seeing
what the call stack is (for purposes of debugging/Ccaller/c.)? Is
it just a matter of looking in P0 and then P0's P0, and so on? Or
will that croak in certain cases?
These are $HL
The story is like this:
- the pseudo gloabal declaration of Cf declares a variable usable in
both subs. This was invented[1] to cover vars outside of all subs in a
main execution stream, which is intersparsed with sub declarations, like
a perl programm could be.
- both subs _foo1 and
On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 10:50:40PM -0400, Miko O Sullivan wrote:
It would be interesting to hear your Perl6 daydreams.
My only dream is that by this time next year we have a fully-
functional-people-can-use-it-in-production Perl6. It doesn't even
have to be 100% complete; I think just 85% would
At 10:46 AM 6/28/2003 -0400, Clinton Pierce wrote:
If you want true variables around compilations units, please use globals
or lexicals if they are in the same lexical pad.
[1] This feature is IMHO at the boarders of imcc as the namespace
instructions is. Should the HL handle these or imcc?
Clint, I'm not sure which feature you mean is confusing here. I think you are
referring to supporting .local outside of subs, and I agree with that. However,
I think symbol tracking and scope checking is the high level language's
responsibility so the example you provided really should not be
Yep. But when it comes to multithreading you can't assume the same
behavior on e.g. single or multiprocessor systems anway.
leo
Sounds like a user-land implementation should be default then, to guarentee
consistancy across hardware let alone machines. Software targeted for specific
uses can
On Saturday 28 June 2003 02:51, Michael G Schwern wrote:
When I merged Test::Simple with Test::More I left a Test-More tarball lying
around containing a Makefile.PL which simply died saying download
Test-Simple instead.
That's OK for a merge (or you could have an empty archive with a
On Sat, Jun 28, 2003 at 10:13:06PM +0100, Fergal Daly wrote:
Is there a way to
know if Makefile.PL is being run by CPAN.pm?
Not as far as I know, but Jos tells me that there should be some way in
the next version of CPANPLUS.
My
Jonathan Scott Duff wrote in perl.perl6.language :
My only dream is that by this time next year we have a fully-
functional-people-can-use-it-in-production Perl6. It doesn't even
have to be 100% complete; I think just 85% would be enough if it were
the right 85%.
20% would be enough if
(I apologize profusely for the formatting--I'm writing this on a rather primitive
webmail system.)
Disclaimer: this is all from possibly faulty memory, except where it's pure
speculation.
Leopold Toetsch:
I'd like to layout some thougts, which get quite dim, when it comes to
threads. So there
Rafael Garcia-Suarez [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jonathan Scott Duff wrote in perl.perl6.language :
My only dream is that by this time next year we have a fully-
functional-people-can-use-it-in-production Perl6. It doesn't even
have to be 100% complete; I think just 85% would be enough if it
24 matches
Mail list logo
