On Feb 3, 2006, at 12:38, Nicholas Clark wrote:
This'll likely be out-of-date tomorrow, but I found it useful as a
quick snapshot/overview of the Parrot repository.
The process used to created it isn't amenable to automation into a
cron job?
It's just a Perl script, so yeah, could be done
On Feb 4, 2006, at 16:51, Joshua Isom via RT wrote:
41 callmethodcc P1, "dump" -
P1=Object(PAST::Node)=PMC(0x50ba68),
102 get_params PMC_C[29] (2), P0, I0 - , P0=PMCNULL,
I0=5289976
106 repeat S0, "", I0- , , I0=5289976
110 add I0, 1- I0=5289976,
Offer Kaye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why not start off by providing ppm.cpan.org (as the OP suggested for
> linux distors), or something similar? There are many modules that I
> want to use where the PPM version provided by ActiveState or some
> other repository is badly of out date..
A
On 1/28/06, Tels wrote:
>
> Of course you must reliaze that, except for pure-perl modules and very
> controlled environments, binary distributions are doomed to fail.
>
> You simple cannot guess what libraries/compiler/system/kernel the user
> has installed, unless you know the distribution and ver
Larry Wall wrote:
> Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of
> Failed
> ---
> t/rules/from_perl6_rules/array_ca 18 460845 10 22.22% 41-45
> t/rules/from_perl6_rules/named_ca 18
I sent a patch into rt, #38405, to address the make archclean issues,
so people could try it out. I'd only tested it on freebsd and darwin
and my main concern was with win32. It does a lot of restructuring to
help make it easier, and I wasn't sure how it'd be with windows.
On Feb 4, 2006, at
# New Ticket Created by Jonathan Worthington
# Please include the string: [perl #38432]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=38432 >
Hi,
Here's an example of what I'm pretty sure is a bug.
.sub main :main
newcl
Hi,
I've read and reread the macro explanation but I'm still not entirely
clear on number of things. The questions and thoughts below are based
on my (mis)understanding.
On 03/02/06 02:05, Larry Wall wrote:
Macros are functions or operators that are called by the compiler as
soon as t
On Feb 5, 2006, at 0:37, Nick Glencross wrote:
Leopold Toetsch (via RT) wrote:
Compiling a static Parrot simplifies debugging, e.g. for setting
breakpoints. But it doesn't play nicely with dynamic extensions.
I'm pretty certain that after a fresh build things works perfectly,
but my hunch
On Feb 4, 2006, at 22:04, Bob Rogers wrote:
[detailed plan]
Sound good? Unless I've missed something, this seems like a win
across the board . . .
Sounds very good.
-- Bob Rogers
leo
Well, here's the xxd dump's head.
[languages/punie/t] jisom% xxd past_node_5.out | head
000: 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020
010: 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020
020: 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020
030: 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020
040: 2020
On Feb 4, 2006, at 14:23, Joshua Isom via RT wrote:
Apparently I have a 267 megabyte past_node_5.out file... And if
past_op_2.pir and past_val_2.pir were printed to a file, I imagine
it'd
do the same(printing a lot of spaces). Seems to be more than just
Parrot::Test for me.
Could you send
Leopold Toetsch (via RT) wrote:
# New Ticket Created by Leopold Toetsch
# Please include the string: [perl #38429]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=38429 >
Platform x86/linux
Compiling a static Parrot sim
Apparently I have a 267 megabyte past_node_5.out file... And if
past_op_2.pir and past_val_2.pir were printed to a file, I imagine it'd
do the same(printing a lot of spaces). Seems to be more than just
Parrot::Test for me.
On Feb 4, 2006, at 12:54 PM, Allison Randal wrote:
On Feb 3, 2006,
On Feb 4, 2006, at 12:26, Leopold Toetsch via RT wrote:
Both on OS/X darwin and x86/linux 'make test' as well as
./parrot -p languages/punie/punie.pbc languages/punie/t/
problematic_1.p1
are succeeding here.
The error is gone here too now. Not sure if it's Leo's fix or unrelated.
Allison
From: Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 14:49:00 +0100
Bob Rogers wrote:
>Worse, the closed-over frame is leaked entirely. (Is this what the
> "obviously leaks memory" comment in src/register.c is talking about, or
> are there other cases of leakage
On Feb 4, 2006, at 0:47, Allison Randal wrote:
It's only in my local svk repository. I'll push it so others can work
on the bug (and try it out on multiple platforms). I temporarily added
a test file language/punie/t/problematic.t that isolates the failing
test (makes it easier to filter thro
On Feb 4, 2006, at 8:09, Patrick R. Michaud via RT wrote:
Like others, problematic.t seems to runs okay on my system
(Linux x86_64). :-( Maybe I can get access to a platform on
which it fails...?
Long ago we had an OS X box available to developers. Is that still
around? If not, I can tempo
On Feb 3, 2006, at 17:33, Joshua Isom via RT wrote:
But, I've encountered two major problems. On darwin, I can't finish
past_node.t, first parrot takes over 100 megs of ram, then perl(5.8.7)
wants 180 megs. On freebsd, it's actually worse, but more confusing.
It fails with past_*.t and post_*.
# New Ticket Created by Leopold Toetsch
# Please include the string: [perl #38429]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=38429 >
Platform x86/linux
Compiling a static Parrot simplifies debugging, e.g. for setting
On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 03:47:11PM -0800, Allison Randal wrote:
>
> It's only in my local svk repository. I'll push it so others can work
> on the bug (and try it out on multiple platforms). I temporarily
> added a test file language/punie/t/problematic.t that isolates the
> failing test (ma
21 matches
Mail list logo
