According to S02, The word returns is allowed as an alias for of. and The as
property specifies a constraint to be enforced on the return value ..., is not
advertised as the type of the routine
However, S06 states,
returns/is returns
The inner type constraint that a routine imposes on
Jonathan Worthington wrote:
Patrick and I will be hacking on the 12th and the 16th. If you've not
seen Copenhagen before, I could forgive you for wanting to spend a day
enjoying the city rather than hacking though - it's nice! :-)
I have, in fact, seen Copenhagen before, and if it weren't
On Tue Jul 22 06:10:41 2008, fperrad wrote:
In fact 'docall' uses a pushaction.
I modified 'docall' so it no longer uses pushaction, and all Lua tests
are now passing.
# New Ticket Created by jason switzer
# Please include the string: [perl #57522]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=57522
The test harness used the default verbosity mode provided by TAP::Harness.
It
chromatic and I have fixed the majority of the language issues (see
child tickets for specific comments). I will merge the branch back into
trunk first thing tomorrow morning (Saturday, August 2nd).
In r29934 of the branch, I can't even get tcl to build, it keeps
complaining about calls to tcl_error_s which it says doesn't exist.
Since you mentioned you were eliminating the versions of tcl_error
identical to 'die', I went through and replaced the calls to tcl_error
with calls to die. It
# New Ticket Created by Robert G. Jakabosky
# Please include the string: [perl #57504]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=57504
Hello everyone,
This is my first patch to the parrot project.
This
On Sat Jun 14 17:17:03 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can anyone on FreeBSD give us an update on this issue?
freebsd7, recent parrot svn (r29922)
passes the t/op/trans.t tests
Determining JIT capability.yes
It even works with freebsd's make, not only
Andy Dougherty schrieb:
On Sat, 14 Jun 2008, James Keenan via RT wrote:
Can we get an update as to the issues raised in this ticket?
The general issue
installeld parrot conflicts with dev parrot
-- at least when a shared libparrot.so is used
is, as far as I know, unsolved. A
- Original Message -
From: Robert G. Jakabosky (via RT) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [perl #57504] [PATCH][Lua] Fixed 64bit bug in Lua bytecode
decoder/translator.
Changes to 'languages/lua/t/os.t':
1 test from 'os.t' fails on 64bit systems because 'os.time()' does not
return
a 'nil'
I have tried this patch out in a sandbox from trunk and, at the very
least, it does no harm with anything up through Parrot's 'make test'.
I rarely go into the languages or, for example, run Rakudo's 'make
test', so I'm unclear as to how to use this. What would I do after I've
called:
cd
On Sat Aug 02 05:06:31 2008, rurban wrote:
On Sat Jun 14 17:17:03 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can anyone on FreeBSD give us an update on this issue?
freebsd7, recent parrot svn (r29922)
passes the t/op/trans.t tests
Thanks for looking into this, Reini. Now, would these failures
On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 5:00 AM, Allison Randal via RT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In r29934 of the branch, I can't even get tcl to build, it keeps
complaining about calls to tcl_error_s which it says doesn't exist.
Since you mentioned you were eliminating the versions of tcl_error
identical to
On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 11:00 AM, Will Coleda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 5:00 AM, Allison Randal via RT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In r29934 of the branch, I can't even get tcl to build, it keeps
complaining about calls to tcl_error_s which it says doesn't exist.
Since you
On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 11:07 AM, Will Coleda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 11:00 AM, Will Coleda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 5:00 AM, Allison Randal via RT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In r29934 of the branch, I can't even get tcl to build, it keeps
On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 11:20 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: coke
Date: Sat Aug 2 08:20:01 2008
New Revision: 29940
Modified:
branches/pdd25cx/languages/tcl/src/macros.pir
Log:
[tcl] The error message is actually in the 'message' slot now; having the
wrong name here was causing
On Sat, Aug 02, 2008 at 01:50:42AM -0500, John M. Dlugosz wrote:
According to S02, The word returns is allowed as an alias for of. and
The as property specifies a constraint to be enforced on the return
value ..., is not advertised as the type of the routine
However, S06 states,
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 05:56:14AM -0500, John M. Dlugosz wrote:
In S04, Other similar Code-only forms ...
What does that mean?
It is feebly attempting to say that, because these are control flow
functions, the argument is really a thunk that the function has
control of when and how it's
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 05:25:53AM -0500, John M. Dlugosz wrote:
In S04, Note that temporizations that are undone upon scope exit must be
prepared to be redone if a continuation within that scope is taken.
What will create a continuation there and how do you take it?
That is, how will this
# New Ticket Created by Patrick R. Michaud
# Please include the string: [perl #57530]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=57530
Schwern provided the following patch at the OSCON hackathon,
but we should
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 10:07:49AM +0100, Klaas-Jan Stol wrote:
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 9:06 PM, via RT Will Coleda wrote
From PDD19:
=item .pragma n_operators [deprecated]
does this mean that by default all ops will have the n_ prefix by default?
That would imply some variants of these
On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 1:52 PM, Patrick R. Michaud (via RT)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
# New Ticket Created by Patrick R. Michaud
# Please include the string: [perl #57530]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL:
On 2008 Aug 2, at 12:57, Larry Wall wrote:
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 05:56:14AM -0500, John M. Dlugosz wrote:
In S04, Other similar Code-only forms ...
What does that mean?
It is feebly attempting to say that, because these are control flow
functions, the argument is really a thunk that the
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 10:46:27PM -0700, Carl Mäsak wrote:
$ svn info | grep Revi
Revision: 29902
$ ./perl6 -e 'enum WeekdayMonday Tuesday;' # works
$ ./perl6 -e 'enum WeekdayMonday;' # doesn't
get_pmc_keyed() not implemented in class 'Perl6Str'
[...]
Likewise,
$ ./perl6 -e 'enum A
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 10:53:30PM -0700, Carl Mäsak wrote:
$ ./perl6 -e 'enum WeekdayMonday Tuesday; say Monday' # works
0
$ ./perl6 -e 'enum WeekdayMonday Tuesday; say Monday.perl' # doesn't
Method 'perl' not found for invocant of class ''
[...]
I'm not entirely clear on what I expected
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 10:50:32PM -0700, Carl Mäsak wrote:
$ svn info | grep vi
$ ./perl6 -e 'enum WeekdayMonday Tuesday; say Tuesday.WHAT'
Null PMC access in find_method()
[...]
This is likely related to RT #57450, in that it's not clear
how enums should report their type or .perl
Bernhard Schmalhofer wrote:
Jonathan Worthington schrieb:
Allison Randal wrote:
Bernhard Schmalhofer wrote:
We could always do the 12th AND the 16th, just for fun and bonus
productivity (if everyone isn't exhausted from a day of hacking and
three days of conference)? ;-)
Patrick and I will
Author: allison
Date: Sat Aug 2 15:45:13 2008
New Revision: 29952
Modified:
trunk/docs/pdds/draft/pdd08_keys.pod
trunk/docs/pdds/pdd17_pmc.pod
trunk/docs/pdds/pdd23_exceptions.pod
Changes in other areas also in this revision:
Added:
trunk/src/pmc/exceptionhandler.pmc
- copied
I've edited several of the S??.pod files,but I have not heard back from
the owner ($Larry, whose name is on the top of the file) about accepting
merging or rejecting my changes.
I've posted the files to http://www.dlugosz.com/Perl6/offerings/ so
they don't get lost, until someone with
I just merged in the pdd25cx branch. Resolving all the conflicts took
several hours (124 files, 1 minute or more per file...), but otherwise
it went smoothly.
The biggest changes you'll notice are the new exception system, a vastly
reduced usage of the remaining stack (though it's not
OK I think I''m getting it.
You seem to have introduced the ability to use a statement rather than a
block in these constructs. E.g. try blahblah;
Is that in general?
So the statements needs to be closure-block-like, even though braces are
not written, so anything that depends on it being
Applied in r29959. tetragon++. Marking ticket resolved.
32 matches
Mail list logo
