At 12:11 AM -0400 8/27/02, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
>www.parrotcode.org/docs seems to like them, so here they are.
>This rolls in the byteorder.dev patch previously submitted.
>
Applied, thanks.
--
Dan
--"it's like this
At 10:51 PM -0400 8/26/02, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
>The web conversion (www.parrotcode.org/docs) results in a blank page as
>this file isn't PODified. Patch remedies.
Applied, thanks.
--
Dan
--"it's like this"
Okay, I just added a big chunk of code to imcc. The code does two main
things:
- changes imcc syntax to disallow newlines within ops. You can
still have all the newlines you want between ops and after labels, but
this:
if $P1
goto label
will no longer work. Since no one app
> It currently works on my version of MSVC with nmake and friends. A few
> minutes ago, it worked on cygwin/GCC as well. Unfortunately, I broke
> something, I'm not sure what, and it doesn't work on cygwin anymore. I'm
> going to sleep now, and will probably pick up again on this tomorrow
> night.
www.parrotcode.org/docs seems to like them, so here they are.
This rolls in the byteorder.dev patch previously submitted.
(I see in the patch that we're not consistent with what a line ending
should be. I've left that alone.)
--
Bryan C. Warnock
bwarnock@(gtemail.net|raba.com)
Index: intro.
How does one patch a file to delete?
docs/a5_draft.html can go away now, thank you for playing.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
bwarnock@(gtemail.net|raba.com)
The web conversion (www.parrotcode.org/docs) results in a blank page as
this file isn't PODified. Patch remedies.
(I forget whether attachments are verboten or preferred - I can't seem
to find any included documentation on how to submit patches. I should
probably add that to the list of things
On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> Currently, a fresh checkout of the cvs tree contains 2215 files, but only
> 497 of them are listed in MANIFEST. Most are the icu/ files, but there
> are scattered others as well. I'm unsure if all of them are supposed
> to be in MANIFEST yet (e.g. is
Currently, a fresh checkout of the cvs tree contains 2215 files, but only
497 of them are listed in MANIFEST. Most are the icu/ files, but there
are scattered others as well. I'm unsure if all of them are supposed
to be in MANIFEST yet (e.g. is icu a work-in-progress?) but could those
who have
On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, Markus Laire wrote:
> On 25 Aug 2002 at 23:01, Sean O'Rourke wrote:
>
> > Ah, _parser_ tests! (hits self on head). Those are out-of-date, and
> > should be disabled. The fact that all the compiler tests pass is a
> > relief, and indicates that all is well. How does t/rx/bas
On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> All ways of doing deterministic destruction seem to have considerable
> overhead.
One possible alternative would be to have file handles and other objects
with destructors that have to be called in a timely fashion keep
ref-counts. When the refcount d
# New Ticket Created by Jason Gloudon
# Please include the string: [perl #16772]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=16772 >
This adds the printf format string for UINTVAL. hash.c needs this, but I'm not
includ
On Sun, 25 Aug 2002, Mike Lambert wrote:
> # New Ticket Created by Mike Lambert
> # Please include the string: [perl #16741]
> # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
> # http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=16741 >
>
>
> The below patch fixes the languages
On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, Steve Fink wrote:
> # New Ticket Created by Steve Fink
> # Please include the string: [perl #16767]
> # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
> # http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=16767 >
>
>
> - eliminates a bunch of seg faults from
On 26 Aug 2002 at 13:48, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> > I got new cvs and applied same 2 patches (dlopen-patch & imcc-patch)
> > only t/rx/basic.{3,4} fails, both with same error:
>
> Please rebuild the grammar (there is currently no Makefile autmagic for
> this):
>
> $ perl6 --force -v --tree --
In message
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Have you taken a look at the proposed ops in PDD6? They may not be
> what we ultimately want to use, but it might be a place to start.
> (And I'd rather avoid generic vtable access to keys if at
Markus Laire wrote:
> On 25 Aug 2002 at 23:01, Sean O'Rourke wrote:
> I got new cvs and applied same 2 patches (dlopen-patch & imcc-patch)
>
> only t/rx/basic.{3,4} fails, both with same error:
Please rebuild the grammar (there is currently no Makefile autmagic for
this):
$ perl6 --force -
At 10:56 AM +0100 8/26/02, Tom Hughes wrote:
>The one part of the keyed access puzzle that my last patch did not
>attempt to address is that of constructing keys dynamically.
>
>As things stand you can create a key PMC and you can set the value
>of that PMC to a given integer, number, string or PM
The one part of the keyed access puzzle that my last patch did not
attempt to address is that of constructing keys dynamically.
As things stand you can create a key PMC and you can set the value
of that PMC to a given integer, number, string or PMC value. What you
can't do is join several key PMC
On 25 Aug 2002 at 23:01, Sean O'Rourke wrote:
> Ah, _parser_ tests! (hits self on head). Those are out-of-date, and
> should be disabled. The fact that all the compiler tests pass is a
> relief, and indicates that all is well. How does t/rx/basic.t do?
I got new cvs and applied same 2 patches
Markus Laire wrote:
> I just checked all failed tests. Worst problem seems to be that tests
> returns int/str instead of PerlInt/PerlString
>
> t/parser/apoc1.t 1 256 11 100.00% 1
parser test's are currently broken due to changes in the Parser and
should be disabled in t/
> > "make shared" dies with 'missing .h files'
>
> More competent and/or Windows-savvy hands than mine are working on this as
> we speak.
I believe the proper term is stubbornly persistent. Attached is a patch to
fix up parrot shared-libraries, imcc, and perl6 all to work on win32.
It currently
How does this work?
1 my $fh = IO::File->new(...);
# Compiler can know that the new object is still linked.
2 &some_sub ($fh); # Who knows? :-)
# Compiler will assume that new object is still linked.
3 undef $fh;
# Er? Need a DOD run right now, because that may have been the las
23 matches
Mail list logo