At 3:01 PM -0500 7/2/02, Eric Kidder wrote:
>If no one has any objections, I am planning on adding the undocumented
>opcodes to pdd06_pasm.pod. For the most part, I am just going to copy the
>pod documentation from the various *.ops files to pdd06. For those
>opcodes without documentation or whi
FYI,
PMCs ParrotPointer, ParrotSub and ParrotCoroutine have been
renamed to Pointer, Sub and Coroutine.
Parrot PMCs reserve the basic names, and language specific (Perl*, Ruby*)
should prepend their PMCs with the language name.
-Melvin
On 4 Jul 2002, Erik [ISO-8859-1] Bågfors wrote:
: On Thu, 2002-07-04 at 11:19, Andy Wardley wrote:
: > I personally believe this approach is flawed, especially considering the fact
: > that there is no way (that I know of) to force block parameters to be truly
: > lexically scoped or temporary (i
# New Ticket Created by Leon Brocard
# Please include the string: [netlabs #762]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://bugs6.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=762 >
The assembler syntax for PMCs changed from PerlHash to .PerlHash a
while ago and this
On Thu, 2002-07-04 at 11:19, Andy Wardley wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 03:20:35PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > I'm pretty sure the iterators they build are just closures with named
> > arguments, and behave as any other closure would behave.
>
> Not quite. Ruby iterators expect a block.
On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 03:20:35PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> I'm pretty sure the iterators they build are just closures with named
> arguments, and behave as any other closure would behave.
Not quite. Ruby iterators expect a block. This is very much like a closure
except that block paramet
