Re: thread vs signal

2001-09-29 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 09:51 AM 9/29/2001 -0400, Michael Maraist wrote: > > > > I generally divide signals into two groups: > > > > *) Messages from outside (i.e. SIGHUP) > > *) Indicators of Horrific Failure (i.e. SIGBUS) > > > > Generally speaking, parrot should probably just up and die for the first > > type,

Re: [PATCH] (AGAIN) NV constants in constant table

2001-09-29 Thread Tom Hughes
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Gregor N. Purdy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sorry about that, Tom. I really need to add -N to my .cvsrc... > I just sent the (hopefully) complete patch to the list. Please try > it out against a fresh checkout and let me know how it works for > you...

Re: SV: Parrot multithreading?

2001-09-29 Thread Benjamin Stuhl
--- Alan Burlison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > or have entered a mutex, > > > > If they're holding a mutex over a function call without > a > > _really_ good reason, it's their own fault. > > Rubbish. It is common to take out a lock in an outer > functions and then > to call several othe

Re: [PATCH] (AGAIN) NV constants in constant table

2001-09-29 Thread Gregor N. Purdy
Tom -- > > There was trouble with the attachment on my last post, so here it > > comes again... > > That patches and builds OK but the added files are not in the > patch so Parrot/Assembler.pm at least is missing and this I can't > run any tests. Sorry about that, Tom. I really need to add -N t

Re: [PATCH] (AGAIN) NV constants in constant table

2001-09-29 Thread Tom Hughes
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Gregor N. Purdy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There was trouble with the attachment on my last post, so here it > comes again... That patches and builds OK but the added files are not in the patch so Parrot/Assembler.pm at least is missing and this I can

Re: [PATCH] Moving NV constants to the constant table

2001-09-29 Thread Gregor N. Purdy
Tom -- > There seems to be a lot of the patch missing: I don't know what happened there. Maybe my mailer flaked. Anyway, stay tuned. I'll resend to the list. Regards, -- Gregor _ / perl -e 'srand(-2091643526); print ch

Re: [PATCH] Moving NV constants to the constant table

2001-09-29 Thread Tom Hughes
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Gregor N. Purdy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Let me know how this works for you... There seems to be a lot of the patch missing: gosford [~/src/parrot-nvconst] % patch -N < /tmp/nvconst.patch patching file Makefile.in patching file Types_pm.in patching

Re: Solaris problems with trans.t

2001-09-29 Thread Buggs
On Saturday 29 September 2001 16:23, Gibbs Tanton - tgibbs wrote: > Ok, I've added (NV) to all of the integer trans ops arguments. See if that > helps. It gives some warnings "basic_opcodes.c", line 226: warning: statement not reached "basic_opcodes.c", line 234: warning: statement not reached

Re: [Patch] A bit of linting

2001-09-29 Thread Andy Dougherty
In perl.perl6.internals, you wrote: >I'm attaching a patch which adds a "lint" target to the makefile (running >lclint with some very lenient settings) and fixes some of the things it >was griping about. > >The changes are all pretty trivial, and fall into the following categories: > - cast

[PATCH] Moving NV constants to the constant table

2001-09-29 Thread Gregor N. Purdy
All -- This now works on my system. This is a big change, so we really need to see results from folks before we even think about committing this. Also, I've probably made some style or portability missteps in a change this large, so I'd appreciate some feedback there, too. If we can make whatever

RE: Solaris problems with trans.t

2001-09-29 Thread Gibbs Tanton - tgibbs
Ok, I've added (NV) to all of the integer trans ops arguments. See if that helps. -Original Message- From: Michael G Schwern To: Buggs Cc: Gibbs Tanton - tgibbs; '[EMAIL PROTECTED] ' Sent: 9/28/2001 10:39 PM Subject: Re: Solaris problems with trans.t On Sat, Sep 29, 2001 at 05:22:41AM

RE: SV: Parrot multithreading?

2001-09-29 Thread Michael Maraist
> > or have entered a muteX, > > If they're holding a mutex over a function call without a > _really_ good reason, it's their own fault. General perl6 code is not going to be able to prevent someone from calling code that in-tern calls XS-code. Heck, most of what you do in perl involves some sor

Re: thread vs signal

2001-09-29 Thread Michael Maraist
> > I generally divide signals into two groups: > > *) Messages from outside (i.e. SIGHUP) > *) Indicators of Horrific Failure (i.e. SIGBUS) > > Generally speaking, parrot should probably just up and die for the first > type, and turn the second into events. I don't know. SIGHUP is useful to

[patch] chopn Sx Ix et. al.

2001-09-29 Thread Alex Gough
It seems odd to have the chopn_s_ic and not a chopn_s_i op, this patch adds this, and simillar ops (+ tests!) for shr and shl. I don't know if these count as new features or not... Also, string_chopn was not checking for OOB values for n, this is fixed and the (currenlty skipped) jump test in basi

memory allocation paper (Courtesy of Alan)

2001-09-29 Thread Dan Sugalski
Ask has found us a spot for the paper Alan was speaking of. http://dev.perl.org/perl6/talks/ http://www.parrotcode.org/talks/ It's pretty interesting on first skim. Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugals