Hey, I was going throuh the RT system looking to resolve issues.
It looks like the offending lines of code are still there. A quick look at
the problem, and I see the following patch:
Index: hash.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/public/parrot/h
>I don't like spam. Thanks for keeping it out.
I try. :)
>How do you recruit new "someone"s?
I head down to the local mall and hold up a big sign.
>Are they the same sort of "someone"s who manage perl5 bugs?
Yup.
(Or just anyone silly enough to volunteer.)
>And (IIRC) Spam Assassin is th
> "KF" == Ken Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Jason Gloudon wrote:
>> http://www.ddj.com/ftp/2001/2001_07/aa0701.txt
>> I believe the LOOKUP method was the fastest for me on SPARC, if I
>> recall
>> correctly.
> Did they really spend 64K to create a lookup table just to find
Jason Gloudon wrote:
> http://www.ddj.com/ftp/2001/2001_07/aa0701.txt
>
> I believe the LOOKUP method was the fastest for me on SPARC, if I recall
> correctly.
Did they really spend 64K to create a lookup table just to find
the most significant bit? Calculating log2 for a power of two is
simpler
On Fri, Aug 02, 2002 at 01:06:27AM -0300, Daniel Grunblatt wrote:
>
> On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Nicholas Clark wrote:
>
> > Here goes. This *isn't* functional - it's the least amount of work I could
> > get away with (before midnight) that gets the inner loop of mops.pasm JITted.
> >
>
> Applied, man
On Sat, Aug 03, 2002 at 12:07:30PM -0400, Ken Fox wrote:
> Nicholas Clark wrote:
> >It seems that foo & (foo - 1) is zero only for a power of 2 (or foo == 0)
> >but is there a fast way once you know that foo is a power of 2, to find out
> >log2 foo?
The ARM doesn't have a find first set bit inst
On Sat, Aug 03, 2002 at 11:35:08AM +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> I presume in the general case I'd have to know whether to call
> Parrot_jit_normal_op() or Parrot_jit_cpcf_op(), so could there be a subroutine
> in jit.c that I could call to make the correct decision for me?
Here is a patch for
On Sat, Aug 03, 2002 at 02:53:22PM +, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> # New Ticket Created by Jarkko Hietaniemi
> # Please include the string: [perl #15962]
> # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
> # http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=15962 >
>
>
> N
Nicholas Clark wrote:
> But there do seem already to be arguably duplicate 2 operand versions of
> many ops. Hence I was surprised at the lack of consistency.
Right. I suspect that as people get more experience with the new
Perl 6 compiler the 2 operand ops will go away (or vice versa).
At the v
Nicholas Clark wrote:
> It seems that foo & (foo - 1) is zero only for a power of 2 (or foo == 0)
> but is there a fast way once you know that foo is a power of 2, to find out
> log2 foo?
You're right about (foo & (foo -1)).
gcc uses a repeated test and shift. That's works very nicely if foo
is
On Sat, Aug 03, 2002 at 10:51:41AM -0400, Ken Fox wrote:
> Nicholas Clark wrote:
> >I can write more a efficient implementation of abs_i ... things will
> >go slightly faster
>
> The law of diminishing returns is broken for a VM. Eventually you
> reach a point where adding more ops actually decre
On Sat, Aug 03, 2002 at 11:22:16AM +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> How come there is abs_i_i to put the absolute value of $2 into $1, but there's
> no abs_i to convert $1 to absolute?
>
> I can write more a efficient implementation of abs_i, because I don't need to
> store the value back if it's a
# New Ticket Created by Jarkko Hietaniemi
# Please include the string: [perl #15962]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=15962 >
Not all places have COMSPEC.
--- lib/Parrot/Configure/Step.pm.dist 2002-08-03 1
Nicholas Clark wrote:
> I can write more a efficient implementation of abs_i ... things will
> go slightly faster
The law of diminishing returns is broken for a VM. Eventually you
reach a point where adding more ops actually decreases total
performance. Instead of the change in performance tendin
Nicholas Clark wrote:
> but in the scope of use integer signed integers are used:
>
> $ perl -we '$a = 0xDEADBEEF; {use integer; $b = $a >> 4} printf "%08X\n%08X\n", $a,
>$b'
> DEADBEEF
> FDEADBEE
>
> [Actually, IIRC it's up to the C implementation what it does, but for both
> platforms I've ju
I'm not sure what the solution to this is...
If you're shifting left, there's no confusion.
If you're shifting right, do you sign extend?
Perl actually gives you two options - the default uses unsigned integers in C:
$ perl -we '$a = 0xDEADBEEF; $b = $a >> 4; printf "%08X\n%08X\n", $a, $b'
DEAD
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dave Mitchell) writes:
> > Or would that make access by name too slow?
> It's how Perl5 does it (very roughly speaking)
This is a reminder that people new to developing VMs may find it useful
to leaf through http://www.netthink.co.uk/downloads/internals.pdf and
http://www.netth
On Fri, Aug 02, 2002 at 03:59:28PM -0400, Richard Prescott wrote:
> IMHO, C version shall exist anyway, for speed comparaison first (it is
> always surprising how good compilers can be in some situations), then you
> could find tricks that are faster on some processors (let's say AMD) and
> not on
How come there is abs_i_i to put the absolute value of $2 into $1, but there's
no abs_i to convert $1 to absolute?
I can write more a efficient implementation of abs_i, because I don't need to
store the value back if it's already >=0. If the parrot assembler had the
option of writing out abs I$fo
Applied, thanks.
Mike Lambert
Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2002 15:03:21 GMT
> From: Jarkko Hietaniemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [perl #15943] [PATCH] UNICOS/mk vs dynaloading continues
> Resent-Date: 2 Aug 2002 15:03:21
Applied, thanks.
Mike Lambert
Simon Glover wrote:
> Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2002 21:40:51 GMT
> From: Simon Glover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [perl #15953] [PATCH] More GC tests
> Resent-Date: 2 Aug 2002 21:40:52 -
> Resent-From: [EMAIL PR
Applied, thanks.
Mike Lambert
Simon Glover wrote:
> Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2002 21:39:13 GMT
> From: Simon Glover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [perl #15952] [PATCH] Minor doc fix in core.ops
> Resent-Date: 2 Aug 2002 21:39:13 -
> Resent-Fro
Fixed, thanks.
Mike Lambert
Simon Glover wrote:
> Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2002 21:19:29 GMT
> From: Simon Glover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [perl #15951] [BUG] header_allocs_since_last_collect never
> updated
> Resent-Date: 2 Aug 2002 21:1
Applied, thanks.
Mike Lambert
Simon Glover wrote:
> Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2002 21:00:19 GMT
> From: Simon Glover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [perl #15949] [PATCH] Silence warning in hash clone
> Resent-Date: 2 Aug 2002 21:00:19 -
> Resent
Applied, thanks.
Mr. Nobody wrote:
> Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2002 20:57:57 GMT
> From: Mr. Nobody <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [perl #15948] [PATCH] Configure broken on windows 9x
> Resent-Date: 2 Aug 2002 20:57:57 -
> Resent-From: [EMAIL PRO
25 matches
Mail list logo
