[perl #52840] [CAGE] Recode PIR and PASM tests that use stack.ops

2008-04-22 Thread Patrick R. Michaud via RT
As of r27105 these have all been recoded to avoid the stack.ops . The only exception is t/op/stacks.t, which can be removed when we remove the stack.ops in RT#52842 . Closing ticket, and thanks! Pm

Re: [perl #52840] [CAGE] Recode PIR and PASM tests that use stack.ops

2008-04-21 Thread Bob Rogers
I found the results of an experiment (done in r26933) where I used the attached patch to disable all stack ops, and then did make test. (I had misplaced it, which is why I didn't post it earlier; sorry about that.) Here are the failing tests: Failed Test Stat Wstat Total

Re: [perl #52840] [CAGE] Recode PIR and PASM tests that use stack.ops

2008-04-21 Thread Patrick R. Michaud
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 11:04:13PM -0400, Bob Rogers wrote: Content-Description: message body text t/op/jit.t 1 256621 1.61% 55 This one requires removing saveall and restoreall handling from imcc (done in the stacks branch). t/op/stacks.t

[perl #52840] [CAGE] Recode PIR and PASM tests that use stack.ops

2008-04-13 Thread via RT
# New Ticket Created by Bob Rogers # Please include the string: [perl #52840] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=52840 This is a prerequisite to removing the user_stack operations. These ops can be

Re: [perl #52840] [CAGE] Recode PIR and PASM tests that use stack.ops

2008-04-13 Thread Patrick R. Michaud
On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 08:24:57PM -0700, Bob Rogers wrote: This is a prerequisite to removing the user_stack operations. These ops can be found easily by adding: real_exception(interp, NULL, 1, Stack op 'xyz' used.\n); to the code in src/ops/stack.ops, running make test, and

Re: [perl #52840] [CAGE] Recode PIR and PASM tests that use stack.ops

2008-04-13 Thread Bob Rogers
From: Patrick R. Michaud [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2008 10:56:08 -0500 For others who may be reading this ticket/thread, I just want to reconfirm and/or verify that we're *not* intending to eliminate the bsr/ret opcodes themselves from Parrot . . . Yes, that is correct.