[perl #63146] [TODO] Implement (*@) in the LHS of 'my' declarations

2009-02-12 Thread Carl Mäsak via RT
Larry (): Actually, that would have to be (*@) in a my, since a my takes a signature. You can only use (*) in an ordinary list assignment: (*) = 5; ($a,$b,$c,*) = @values; Ok, since the latter two work already, I'm rescuing this bug ticket by re-naming it [TODO] Implement (*@) in

[perl #63158] wrong namespace in eval

2009-02-12 Thread via RT
# New Ticket Created by Ilya Belikin # Please include the string: [perl #63158] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=63158 Hi there! This is works: our $x = 42; eval('our $x; say $x;') but this is not:

Re: References to parts of declared packages

2009-02-12 Thread Chris Fields
On Feb 11, 2009, at 2:46 PM, Carl Mäsak wrote: Jon (), Jonasthan (): If we declared, for example: role A::B {}; Then what should a reference to A be here? At the moment, Rakudo treats it as a post-declared listop, however I suspect we should be doing something a bit smarter? If so,

[perl #63170] Null PMC access when calling method on proto-object on imported role, when the method has a parameter with another role as a type

2009-02-12 Thread Carl Mäsak
# New Ticket Created by Carl Mäsak # Please include the string: [perl #63170] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=63170 In Rakudo b2e7ac, Parrot r36619: $ cat A.pm use v6; role A { method x(B $b) {} } $

r25306 - docs/Perl6/Spec

2009-02-12 Thread pugs-commits
Author: lwall Date: 2009-02-12 18:04:41 +0100 (Thu, 12 Feb 2009) New Revision: 25306 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S10-packages.pod docs/Perl6/Spec/S11-modules.pod docs/Perl6/Spec/S12-objects.pod Log: [S10] updates to package policies Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S10-packages.pod

r25308 - docs/Perl6/Spec

2009-02-12 Thread pugs-commits
Author: lwall Date: 2009-02-12 18:50:43 +0100 (Thu, 12 Feb 2009) New Revision: 25308 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S03-operators.pod Log: some cleanup suggested by Jonathan Dataweaver Lang++ detangling of metaoperators from metatokens metatokens are composed of metaoperators plus ordinary

Re: S03: how many metaoperators?

2009-02-12 Thread Larry Wall
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 02:23:15PM -0800, Jon Lang wrote: : With the addition of the reversing metaoperator, the claim that there : are six metaoperators (made in the second paragraph of the meta : operators section) is no longer true. Count again. : Likewise, the reduction : operator is no

r25310 - docs/Perl6/Spec

2009-02-12 Thread pugs-commits
Author: lwall Date: 2009-02-12 19:23:25 +0100 (Thu, 12 Feb 2009) New Revision: 25310 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S03-operators.pod Log: failure of parallelism in headings Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S03-operators.pod === ---

Re: [perl #46503] [TODO] Remove individual runcore command line flags...

2009-02-12 Thread Dany Arbelo
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Will Coleda via RT parrotbug-follo...@parrotcode.org wrote: On Fri Oct 19 17:20:38 2007, particle wrote: i suggest we migrate all existing code to the new options at once, and mark the old options as deprecated. however, i'd like to see the old options

Re: [perl #57764] docs/art/ppp02-pmc.pod -- example 9 segfault

2009-02-12 Thread chromatic
On Thursday 12 February 2009 13:14:42 Will Coleda via RT wrote: Here's a shorter example that still generates a bus error for me on darwin/x86 Oh look, it's an order of destruction problem. And here's a partial bt from the bus error: #0 0x0001 in ?? () #1 0x0107f318 in Parrot_exit

Re: [perl #39714] [TODO] Refactor IMCC to remove static globals

2009-02-12 Thread kjstol
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 9:22 PM, Will Coleda via RT parrotbug-follo...@parrotcode.org wrote: On Tue Jul 04 19:30:44 2006, autri...@gmail.com wrote: IMCC currently relies on a lot of static globals to carry state, and cannot reliably restore them when an error occurs. (grep for static and

Re: [perl #39714] [TODO] Refactor IMCC to remove static globals

2009-02-12 Thread Will Coleda
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 6:09 PM, kjstol parrotc...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 9:22 PM, Will Coleda via RT parrotbug-follo...@parrotcode.org wrote: On Tue Jul 04 19:30:44 2006, autri...@gmail.com wrote: IMCC currently relies on a lot of static globals to carry state, and

Re: [perl #39714] [TODO] Refactor IMCC to remove static globals

2009-02-12 Thread jerry gay
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 15:53, Will Coleda w...@coleda.com wrote: On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 6:09 PM, kjstol parrotc...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 9:22 PM, Will Coleda via RT parrotbug-follo...@parrotcode.org wrote: On Tue Jul 04 19:30:44 2006, autri...@gmail.com wrote: IMCC

S06: named arguments and long names

2009-02-12 Thread Jon Lang
Are required named parameters (e.g., ':$foo!') considered to be part of the long name provided by a signature? (S06 seems to indicate that they aren't.) Either way, can their status with respect to the long name be changed? That is, if they aren't included in the long name, can they be added to

PCT via Perl6: success!

2009-02-12 Thread Chris Dolan
I just finished converting Perk (a Java compiler targeting Parrot) from PCT+NQP/PIR to PCT+Rakudo. That is, the main entry point and actions.pm for my compiler are written in Perl 6. http://github.com/chrisdolan/perk/tree/master I had to make a few little hacks along the way: *