On Thu, 2002-04-25 at 18:14, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> Okay, fair enough. Subs in general will have the following potential
> information:
>
> *) A pointer to a template lexical scratchpad
> *) A pointer to a *real* scratchpad (for co-routines and continuations)
> *) A pointer to a parent lexical sc
At 06:18 PM 5/11/2002 -0400, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
>On Sat, 2002-05-04 at 01:52, Melvin Smith wrote:
> > Reposted to the list so people can comment.
> >
> > As per the IRC discussion with Dan.
> >
> > I've made some progress, not all there, but getting there.
> > I have the loader handling a
On Mon, 2002-04-29 at 11:04, Ilya Martynov wrote:
{snip}
Has this question and patch been addressed?
--
Bryan C. Warnock
bwarnock@(gtemail.net|capita.com)
On Sat, 2002-05-04 at 01:52, Melvin Smith wrote:
> Reposted to the list so people can comment.
>
> As per the IRC discussion with Dan.
>
> I've made some progress, not all there, but getting there.
> I have the loader handling arbitrary byteordering, now I'm
> working on wordsize transforms.
On Sat, May 11, 2002 at 05:49:03PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> Could someone do a fresh checkout into a new directory and give
> Parrot a whirl? I've got one, and Parrot's failing all its tests,
> which is rather troubling.
Ok, I just did. It worked. What architecture are you on? (I'm on
linux
At 5:49 PM -0400 5/11/02, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>Could someone do a fresh checkout into a new directory and give
>Parrot a whirl? I've got one, and Parrot's failing all its tests,
>which is rather troubling.
Right, nevermind. (Of course) Things are working for me now.
--
Could someone do a fresh checkout into a new directory and give
Parrot a whirl? I've got one, and Parrot's failing all its tests,
which is rather troubling.
--
Dan
--"it's like this"---
Dan Sugalski
On Wed, 2002-05-08 at 09:29, Melvin Smith wrote:
>
> Thanks for that, Bryan! I knew someone had posted some stuff claiming
> to have some float conversion stuff, but I couldn't remember who.
>
> This is a very good compilation of the issues we have to address.
>
> I implemented a byteordering s
On Wed, 2002-05-08 at 12:57, Melvin Smith wrote:
>
> Doh! You are right, I missed that.
> It should be opcode_t. Also, I'm not convinced that our INTVAL size should
> differ from opcode_t.
> Someone convince me.
Only if you want to do maximal native math. You don't want opcode_t to
be the same
On Thu, 2002-05-09 at 12:09, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> I was looking at some of the 750 warnings generated by the latest parrot
> build (with INTVAL = opcode_t = long long). Lots of them stem from some
> minor confusion about which integral types to use when. To remove the
> warnings, I'd prefer t
I just applied a couple of patches. You can now use TEST_PROG_ARGS to
pass flags to parrot when running tests. And the flags are now more
interesting: -g disabled the computed goto core if you're on a machine
that supports it in the first place, and -P now works for enabling the
prederef core even
I thought this would be interesting.
http://oss.software.ibm.com/pthreads/
http://www-124.ibm.com/developerworks/projects/pthreads
Short desc :
IBM is creating a new generation of Posix Threads, which will be supported by the
Linux kernel. These threads multiplex user-mode threads onto k
12 matches
Mail list logo
