JüRgen BöMmels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
move the standard-file-handles in io_stdio.c also to PMCs and add the
Applied ...
new 'P'-prototype to build_native_call.pl
... except that one, which was alredy there ;-)
Thanks,
leo
While trying to implement pdd03 inside the PIR assembler I'm not too
sure if I get everything right from pdd03.
Currently I have this:
- a subroutine call can be prototyped or non_prototyped
- a subroutine definition can be both and un_prototyped. In the latter
case it checks CI0 and takes
Thanks for the clarification. Does that mean that a mechanism for
dynamic PMCs would automatically allow them to be written in Parrot
also (and not only load binary libs)?
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.web42.com/crenz/ - http://www.web42.com/
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 12:43 +0200 7/30/03, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
I have started looking at dynamic classes. I have currently
- new subdirectory /dynclasses
- small hack for classes/pmc2c.pl to consider this directory too
- dynclasses/foo.pmc, dynclasses/Makefile (unportable,
Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ event checking without runloop penalty ]
3) So when the next instruction (normal, CG core) or the branch
instruction (prederefed cores) gets executed, first the op_func_table
or the patched instructions are restored and then the event handler
Is it the intended behaviour of make distclean to delete all files
under the CVS/ directories, thus rendering succeeding cvs upd calls
impossible?
--
Sebastian Bergmann
http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://phpOpenTracker.de/
Das Buch zu PHP 5:
From Test::More docs:
# XXX BAD! $pope-isa('Catholic') eq 1
is( $pope-isa('Catholic'), 1,'Is the Pope Catholic?' );
This does not check if $pope-isa('Catholic') is
true, it checks if it returns 1. Very different.
Similar
Has anyone added a ./Build cover target for Module::Build yet? I'm
trying to move some of my stuff from MakeMaker to Build, and can't
really work out how to pull my make cover equivalent across...
Thanks,
Tony
On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 11:47:41AM +0100, Richard Clamp wrote:
trying to move some of my stuff from MakeMaker to Build, and can't
really work out how to pull my make cover equivalent across...
From Siesta::Build, Siesta's Module::Build subclass:
sub ACTION_cover {
my $self = shift;
Hey all,
I'm trying to get functions working
in python, and I'm not sure the best way
to do this.
What seems natural to me is to define
subroutines in the middle of the code
as I walk the parse tree:
.sub __main__
goto endsub
.sub _f
print :(\n
ret
.end
endsub:
Index: io/io_win32.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/public/parrot/io/io_win32.c,v
retrieving revision 1.24
diff -u -r1.24 io_win32.c
--- io/io_win32.c 21 Jul 2003 18:00:45 - 1.24
+++ io/io_win32.c 31 Jul 2003 11:06:04 -
@@ -97,23 +97,23
Michal Wallace:
I can store all my subroutine definitions in
a list or something and then dump them out
after the __main__ routine. Is that the
right approach? It seems strange to me,
but I'm new at this.
That seems to be the way to do it, speaking as someone who's working on a
Perl 5-to-PIL
Michal Wallace wrote:
Hey all,
What seems natural to me is to define
subroutines in the middle of the code
as I walk the parse tree:
You can do that:
.sub __main__
bsr _main
end
.end
.sub _main
.sub _f
print :)\n
ret
.end
.sub _g
print ;-)\n
ret
At 11:10 +0200 7/31/03, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
*) Determine the init and setup routine names
- Parrot_classname_class_setup
- Parrot_classname_class_init
The class_setup also sets the class_enum i.e vtable-base_type.
Well... there are versioning issues there. We ought to be able to
have
Hello,
Some Parrot functions allow a NULL interpreter and some
don't. Parrot_warn for example fails badly if called with a
NULL-interpreter, but in config/gen/platform/ansi.c in
Parrot_floatval_time it is exactly called in this way.
So what functions should allow for a NULL interpreter, which
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Moin,
On Thursday 31 July 2003 12:47, Richard Clamp wrote:
On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 11:39:48AM +0100, Tony Bowden wrote:
Has anyone added a ./Build cover target for Module::Build yet? I'm
trying to move some of my stuff from MakeMaker to Build, and can't
From an old summary:
http://www.perl.com/pub/a/2003/04/p6pdigest/20030427.html?page=2
Paul Hodges took a crack at implementing for as a subroutine and came
up with
something that didn't look too insane. Luke Palmer added a refinement
allowing
for n at a time looping. However, for reasons
At 10:05 AM 7/31/2003 -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
Well, I don't think it's possible, actually. There's a flattening
list context at the beginning (implying a sugary drink from 7 eleven),
followed by a code block. But, as we know, slurpy arrays can only
come at the end of positional
At 01:29 PM 7/31/2003 -0400, Hanson, Rob wrote:
Anyone but me feel the need for non-greedy
slurpy arrays? similar to non-greedy RE matches?
I definately like the idea of having something like that. It probably
wouldn't be used much, but it is nice to have the option.
One thing though, can't you
Anyone but me feel the need for non-greedy
slurpy arrays? similar to non-greedy RE matches?
I definately like the idea of having something like that. It probably
wouldn't be used much, but it is nice to have the option.
One thing though, can't you accomplish the same thing by slurping
# New Ticket Created by Kenneth A Graves
# Please include the string: [perl #23186]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=23186
The .pcc_* directives are working for me in terms of implementing
function
Michal Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
.sub __start__
call __main__
.end
.sub __main__
.sub _f
print :)
ret
.end
$I0 = addr _f
print $I0
end
.end
That prints :), followed by the address,
No, can't imagine that:
$ parrot -o- pirate.imc
__start__:
Vladimir Lipskiy wrote:
Run the Configure script with --jitcapable=0 --execcapable=0
That helped, but shouldn't this be recognized by Configure.pl?
It's a short term workaround.
Hey all,
I'm trying to get functions working
in python, and I'm not sure the best way
to do this.
What seems natural to me is to define
subroutines in the middle of the code
as I walk the parse tree:
.sub __main__
goto endsub
.sub _f
print :(\n
ret
While trying to implement pdd03 inside the PIR assembler I'm not too
sure if I get everything right from pdd03.
Currently I have this:
- a subroutine call can be prototyped or non_prototyped
- a subroutine definition can be both and un_prototyped. In the latter
case it checks CI0 and
On Thu, 31 Jul 2003, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Is it the intended behaviour of make distclean to delete all files
under the CVS/ directories, thus rendering succeeding cvs upd calls
impossible?
As I understand it, make distclean is what you would do before
packaging up Parrot for a
Simon Glover wrote:
As I understand it, make distclean is what you would do before
packaging up Parrot for a public release, so, yes, it should nuke the
CVS and .cvsignore files.
Okay, thanks for the info.
--
Sebastian Bergmann
http://sebastian-bergmann.de/
LIB: fatal error LNK1181: Input file jit_cpu.obj can not be opened
NMAKE: fatal error U1077: 'lib' : Return-Code '0x49d'
Stop.
--
Sebastian Bergmann
http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://phpOpenTracker.de/
Das Buch zu PHP 5:
Run the Configure script with --jitcapable=0 --execcapable=0
or find the line
if (-e jit/$cpuarch/core.jit) {
in config/auto/jit.pl and replace it with this
if (-e jit/$cpuarch/core.jit and $osname ne 'MSWin32') {
LIB: fatal error LNK1181: Input file jit_cpu.obj can not be opened
Thanks, applied.
Simon
Vladimir Lipskiy wrote:
Run the Configure script with --jitcapable=0 --execcapable=0
That helped, but shouldn't this be recognized by Configure.pl?
--
Sebastian Bergmann
http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://phpOpenTracker.de/
Das Buch zu PHP 5:
On Thu, 31 Jul 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
You can do that:
.sub __main__
bsr _main
end
.end
.sub _main
...
So you have just to emit code, to call your real main at the beginning.
Well that worked, and even let me get rid of the
endsub label:
.sub __start__
call __main__
On Thu, 31 Jul 2003, Brent Royal-Gordon wrote:
Michal Wallace:
I can store all my subroutine definitions in
a list or something and then dump them out
after the __main__ routine.
That seems to be the way to do it, speaking as someone who's working
on a Perl 5-to-PIL converter (using the
Juergen Boemmels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
Some Parrot functions allow a NULL interpreter and some
don't. Parrot_warn for example fails badly if called with a
NULL-interpreter, but in config/gen/platform/ansi.c in
Parrot_floatval_time it is exactly called in this way.
So what
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 11:10 +0200 7/31/03, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
*) Determine the init and setup routine names
- Parrot_classname_class_setup
- Parrot_classname_class_init
The class_setup also sets the class_enum i.e vtable-base_type.
Well... there are versioning issues
On 31 Jul 2003, Luke Palmer wrote:
It now runs amk's euclid.py perfectly now.
Do we have a way to compare the speed vs python? :)
We just modify it to repeat 100,000 times or so, and compare that way.
Oh, duh. :)
Which I did. Parrot comes in about 3x slower than python on euclid.
From
Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
PIO_eprintf
PIO_printf
for printing to stderr/stdout during 1st interpreter construction
destruction if something goes wrong. In all other cases we have an
valid interpreter (or an parent interpreter if any).
This means all the
One of my questions is, why do you make so many PerlNums when there
isn't a trace of a floating point number to be found...?
Because I didn't read the docs that said PerlNum means float. :)
I'll switch it to PerlInt (or maybe int?) later...
Yeah, all your auxillary data; i.e. the flags
Hi there,
Since objects are closing in, I begin to work on the new version of
Befunge, that will be written in imcc.
Anyway, whatever the reason, I'm playing with imcc and have some
questions about it:
- will objects introduce a speed overhead? I'm asking this question
because the Lahey
Juergen Boemmels wrote:
Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
PIO_eprintf
PIO_printf
for printing to stderr/stdout during 1st interpreter construction
destruction if something goes wrong. In all other cases we have an
valid interpreter (or an parent interpreter if any).
This means
Kenneth A Graves (via RT) wrote:
The .pcc_* directives are working for me in terms of implementing
function calls. I want to do something similar for iterator calls.
I've decided to implement iterators using coroutines.
Seems very well done and clean to me. Albeit further comments of
lanugage
Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You mind submitting a patch to put this in the languages/pirate
I'd appreciate that very much. Pie-thon, here we come ...
Luke
leo
At 10:24 +0200 7/31/03, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
While trying to implement pdd03 inside the PIR assembler I'm not too
sure if I get everything right from pdd03.
Currently I have this:
- a subroutine call can be prototyped or non_prototyped
- a subroutine definition can be both and un_prototyped.
At 02:54 PM 7/31/2003 -0400, Michal Wallace wrote:
Actually, between imcc and the python compiler
module, it's not nearly as hard as I thought it
would be. So far, I think the parrot version is
actually a lot simpler than the python compiler,
just because imcc is doing so much of the work.
Leo and
At 01:51 PM 7/31/2003 -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
You mind submitting a patch to put this in the languages/pirate
directory of the parrot distro? I'd like to stay up to date, and
probably do some work (as, I imagine, would others).
I'd like to officially complain that pirate is a cooler name than
At 11:02 PM 7/31/2003 +0200, Jerome Quelin wrote:
Anyway, whatever the reason, I'm playing with imcc and have some
questions about it:
I think its officially time to put together a nice set of documentation
for IMCC (like web based). I'll try to start, right after I catch up with the
year of
Leopold Toetsch:
To clean up on scope exit (and after a Perl Cundef ins), the HL emits
a Csweep 0 opcode. This doesn't do Ctrace_system_areas anymore,
because there is nothing unanchored and alive beyond the runloop's stack.
Have I mentioned lately that you guys are geniuses?
--Brent Dax
Daniel Grunblatt:
+PIO_eprintf(interpreter, Parrot VM: Platform JIT_ARCHNAME
+ is not EXEC-capable.\n);
An unprefixed constant like JIT_ARCHNAME should not be available to
embedders. If it is, something's wrong. I don't have a copy of the source
with me, and I'm
Vladimir Lipskiy:
Is there anybody who could drop a couple of lines on account of this
question while
Brent is unget-at-able?
Not quite un-get-at-able--just unable-to-hack-able. :^)
Hey, I use win32 (mingw) and the JIT has always worked fine for me. If
this
is an issue with MSVC, it
On Thursday 31 July 2003 14:31, Brent Dax wrote:
Daniel Grunblatt:
+PIO_eprintf(interpreter, Parrot VM: Platform JIT_ARCHNAME
+ is not EXEC-capable.\n);
An unprefixed constant like JIT_ARCHNAME should not be available to
embedders. If it is, something's wrong.
Anyone but me feel the need for non-greedy slurpy arrays? similar to
non-greedy RE matches?
Then we could do:
sub for ([EMAIL PROTECTED], block) {...}
Proposed behavior of *?@ : All Arguement to Parameter mapping left of it
are processed Left to Right. Once seen, the mapping starts over
- Original Message -
From: Hanson, Rob [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Rod Adams' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Perl 6 Language
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 1:29 PM
Subject: RE: Perl 6's for() signature
Anyone but me feel the need for non-greedy
slurpy arrays? similar to non-greedy
52 matches
Mail list logo
