Phalanx / CPANTS / Kwalitee

2003-10-13 Thread Thomas Klausner
Hi! CPANTS and Phalanx both care about Kwalitee. So I thought it might be a good idea to come up with one more or less complete list of Kwalitee-hints that both projects can use. A lot of the hints listed at http://qa.perl.org/phalanx/kwalitee.html are rather vague, which is OK for Phalanx, as

Re: cvs commit: parrot/io io.c io_buf.c

2003-10-13 Thread Juergen Boemmels
Melvin Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Did you consider using the method interface in ParrotIO? That ought to be even extensible with user code. Yes, I'm trying to get back up to speed on everything. The method interface is a new feature that I need to look at. I've written a first cut on

Re: An evil task for the interested

2003-10-13 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Jeff Clites [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 9, 2003, at 8:43 AM, Dan Sugalski wrote: ... Not a huge task, we just need to order PMCs before destroying them, ..., but there isn't a way to ask a mark() method to set another flag. This leaves me stuck with regard to PMCs with custom mark

Re: [off-list] Re: LANGUAGES.STATUS also for languages not in the tree?

2003-10-13 Thread Piers Cawley
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, 8 Oct 2003, Luke Palmer wrote: Luke Palmer writes: Hi Jos, Jos Visser writes: Mightn't it be (is this English by the way? :-) a good idea to use LANGUAGES.STATUS also for maintaining track of parrot-generating compilers that are not

x86 JIT and GCC 3.3 don't play well together

2003-10-13 Thread Dan Sugalski
To the point of failing near-every test. GCC 2.95, on the other hand, seems quite happy with it. (details at http://tinderbox.perl.org) Could someone take a look at things and see what's going on please? Dan

Re: An evil task for the interested

2003-10-13 Thread Juergen Boemmels
Jeff Clites [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Oct 9, 2003, at 8:43 AM, Dan Sugalski wrote: We've got ordered destruction on the big list 'o things to do, and it looks like we need to get that done sooner rather than later. ... Not a huge task, we just need to order PMCs before destroying

Re: [perl #24185] [PATCH] JIT debugging on AIX

2003-10-13 Thread Dan Sugalski
On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, Adam Thomason wrote: Here's the beginning of support for debugging the JIT core with the native compiler on AIX. This patch implements a replacement for jit_debug.c that emits XCOFF-compatible stabs in order to placate the AIX assembler. It's not quite ready for

Re: FreeBSD (4.8) can't build imcc

2003-10-13 Thread Nick Kostirya
the top level Makefile has this rule to build the object files in languages/imcc: $(IMCC_DIR)/%.o : $(IMCC_DIR)/%.c $(PERL) tools/dev/cc_flags.pl ./CFLAGS $(CC) -I$(IMCC_DIR) $(CFLAGS) -o $@ -c $ the build fails at imcparser.o for me (the first object file) [skipping] Having a grovel

Re: x86 JIT and GCC 3.3 don't play well together

2003-10-13 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To the point of failing near-every test. GCC 2.95, on the other hand, seems quite happy with it. (details at http://tinderbox.perl.org) Could someone take a look at things and see what's going on please? Fix committed. Dan

Re: x86 JIT and GCC 3.3 don't play well together

2003-10-13 Thread Dan Sugalski
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote: Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To the point of failing near-every test. GCC 2.95, on the other hand, seems quite happy with it. (details at http://tinderbox.perl.org) Could someone take a look at things and see what's going on please?

Re: x86 JIT and GCC 3.3 don't play well together

2003-10-13 Thread Juergen Boemmels
Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To the point of failing near-every test. GCC 2.95, on the other hand, seems quite happy with it. (details at http://tinderbox.perl.org) Could someone take a look at things and see what's going on please?

Re: x86 JIT and GCC 3.3 don't play well together

2003-10-13 Thread Dan Sugalski
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Juergen Boemmels wrote: Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To the point of failing near-every test. GCC 2.95, on the other hand, seems quite happy with it. (details at http://tinderbox.perl.org) Could someone take a

Re: Phalanx / CPANTS / Kwalitee

2003-10-13 Thread Michael G Schwern
On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 10:28:29AM +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote: * contains files: * Makefile.PL or Build.PL or configure configure? * README Personally, I find READMEs useless duplication. Even more so now that search.cpan.org works so well. * t/* or test.pl test.pl is not a good

Re: x86 JIT and GCC 3.3 don't play well together

2003-10-13 Thread Juergen Boemmels
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Juergen Boemmels wrote: Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To the point of failing near-every test. GCC 2.95, on the other hand, seems quite happy with it. (details at

Re: FreeBSD (4.8) can't build imcc

2003-10-13 Thread Juergen Boemmels
Nick Kostirya [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I propose replace @$(PERL) tools/dev/cc_flags.pl ./CFLAGS $(CC) $(CFLAGS) ${cc_o_out}$@ -c $ by @$(PERL) tools/dev/cc_flags.pl ./CFLAGS $(CC) $(CFLAGS) -I$(@D) ${cc_o_out}$@ -c $ and remove $(IMCC_DIR)/%${o} : $(IMCC_DIR)/%.c $(PERL)

Re: x86 JIT and GCC 3.3 don't play well together

2003-10-13 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think we're entering a maze of twisty little compiler version quirks, all of them annoying. :( The problem is JIT_CGP. This does nasty things with call frames, as well as gcc does. Only core_ops_cgp.c has to be compiled with mno-accumulate-... Or we

[COMMIT] perl6 sub calling

2003-10-13 Thread Steve Fink
For those of you not on the CVS list, I just committed a rather large change to the perl6 compiler that implements a subset of the A6 subroutine signature rules. My implementation is rather ad-hoc, but it is a decent representation of my slowly evolving understanding of how this stuff's supposed

Re: x86 JIT and GCC 3.3 don't play well together

2003-10-13 Thread Juergen Boemmels
Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think we're entering a maze of twisty little compiler version quirks, all of them annoying. :( The problem is JIT_CGP. This does nasty things with call frames, as well as gcc does. Only core_ops_cgp.c has

Re: x86 JIT and GCC 3.3 don't play well together

2003-10-13 Thread Juergen Boemmels
Juergen Boemmels [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: t/op/number.NOK 38# Failed test (t/op/number.t at line 1038) # got: '12.50 # -1.996899 # ' # expected: '12.50 # 0.00 # ' # Looks like you failed 1 tests of 38. I think I found out why this test is

RE: [perl #24188] [PATCH] io/io_unix.c fails on OS X

2003-10-13 Thread Adam Thomason
Hmm, this still fails on AIX, since the guard (PARROT_HAS_HEADER_SYSSOCKIO) and the header (sys/socket.h) don't match. I don't have sys/sockio.h, but sys/socket.h is required to prevent the same sizeof(incomplete type) error that Michael reported. There's no $Config{i_syssocket}, though, so

RE: [perl #24188] [PATCH] io/io_unix.c fails on OS X

2003-10-13 Thread Dan Sugalski
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Adam Thomason wrote: Hmm, this still fails on AIX, since the guard (PARROT_HAS_HEADER_SYSSOCKIO) and the header (sys/socket.h) don't match. I don't have sys/sockio.h, but sys/socket.h is required to prevent the same sizeof(incomplete type) error that Michael reported.

Website needs updating

2003-10-13 Thread Matt_Fowles
All~ I have noticed that the webpage seems to stay rather behind the current state. Perhaps replacing it with somehting that is easier to keep up-to-date like a wiki would be useful... I don't really know, but at the least it should be updated to state something truer then the current

RE: Website needs updating

2003-10-13 Thread Garrett Goebel
Matt_Fowles wrote: Perhaps replacing it with somehting that is easier to keep up-to-date like a wiki would be useful... Mike Scott created an unofficial wiki at http://www.vendian.org/parrot/wiki/bin/view.cgi -- Garrett Goebel IS Development Specialist ScriptPro Direct:

Re: Phalanx / CPANTS / Kwalitee

2003-10-13 Thread Tels
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Moin, On Monday 13 October 2003 11:57, Michael G Schwern wrote: On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 10:28:29AM +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote: * contains files: * Makefile.PL or Build.PL or configure configure? * README Personally, I find READMEs useless

Re: Phalanx / CPANTS / Kwalitee

2003-10-13 Thread Rafael Garcia-Suarez
Thomas Klausner wrote in perl.qa : Hints that were in Leon's last release, but which I didn't port up to now: * POD errors * POD/Code ratio (what would be a good measurement?) use Pod::Coverage ? * testers results * number of releases

Re: Phalanx / CPANTS / Kwalitee

2003-10-13 Thread Michael G Schwern
On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 06:51:43PM +0200, Tels wrote: * t/* or test.pl test.pl is not a good thing. It doesn't get parsed by make test. It just runs and spits the output to the screen. If a test fails, make test will still succeed. Still, its better than nothing at all. If

Devel::Cover bug in ActiveState Perl for *Linux*

2003-10-13 Thread Ovid
After much research, I've managed to reduce a Devel::Cover bug down to a one-liner which only fails on one box. This box is unique because it's ActiveState Perl for Linux (not my choice!). However, that might be a red herring. My 'perl -V' is below the test case. Does anyone have a similar

Re: Phalanx / CPANTS / Kwalitee

2003-10-13 Thread Tels
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Moin, On Monday 13 October 2003 10:28, Thomas Klausner wrote: Hi! * POD/Code ratio (what would be a good measurement?) No. Some _very_ complex code takes little documentation like: =head2 sub delete_first_n_entries($N) Deletes the first N

Re: Devel::Cover bug in ActiveState Perl for *Linux*

2003-10-13 Thread Ovid
FYI: I've managed to replicate this error on another ActiveState Perl linux box. The Perl -V information is the same, but the module list is quite a bit smaller. The only common element that I can find is ActiveState. Cheers, Ovid = Silence is Evil

Re: Devel::Cover bug in ActiveState Perl for *Linux*

2003-10-13 Thread Paul Johnson
On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 01:49:58PM -0700, Ovid wrote: After much research, I've managed to reduce a Devel::Cover bug down to a one-liner which only fails on one box. This box is unique because it's ActiveState Perl for Linux (not my choice!). However, that might be a red herring. My 'perl

RE: [perl #24188] [PATCH] io/io_unix.c fails on OS X

2003-10-13 Thread Melvin Smith
At 04:15 PM 10/13/2003 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Adam Thomason wrote: Hmm, this still fails on AIX, since the guard (PARROT_HAS_HEADER_SYSSOCKIO) and the header (sys/socket.h) don't match. I don't have sys/sockio.h, but sys/socket.h is required to prevent the same

Re: Website needs updating

2003-10-13 Thread Robert Spier
Coming soon, a revised website that'll be easy for everyone to send patches to, and much easier for us to give others direct access to modifying it. The core is in place, but there are one or two technical chunks that need to get finished before I can call it done. (or at least feature/content