On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 09:13:07AM -0400, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> On 26 Sep 2002, Tom Hughes wrote:
>
> > Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > > The problem here is that the rule in the Makefile that causes it to
> > > > rerun Configure.pl if any of the Configure.pl genera
On Fri 27 Sep 2002 08:23, Leopold Toetsch (via RT)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> # New Ticket Created by Leopold Toetsch
> # Please include the string: [perl #17615]
> # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
> # http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=17615 >
# New Ticket Created by Leopold Toetsch
# Please include the string: [perl #17615]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=17615 >
Attached patch fixed the "make --test" problem, reported by Tanton et al.
Actually i
> Hhm - could you track this further down?
>
> For failing e.g. 1_1.p6:
>
> $ ./perl6 -vwk t/compiler/1_1.p6
>
> $ ../imcc/imcc -d -d -d t/compiler/1_1.imc >1_1.debug 2>&1
> $ less 1_1.debug
Those both work fine.
However, if I do
perl prd-perl6.pl --batch
At 10:13 PM +0200 9/26/02, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>Dan Sugalski wrote:
>
>>And I'm seeing it on OS X with 5.6.0. Okay, we're doing something
>>screwy somewhere.
>
>
>"it" - not so much details please ;-)
Sorry, the originally reported problem. Basically all the perl6 tests
fail with assembler e
Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 5:40 PM +0100 9/26/02, Peter Sinnott wrote:
>> I'm running linux on intel with perl 5.6.1.
Please run:
$ perl6 --force-grammar --test
$ perl6 --test -r
both ought to succeed on your platform.
> And I'm seeing it on OS X with 5.6.0. Okay, we're doing something scre
Peter Sinnott wrote:
So we have ...
>>$ perl6 --test
> Looks bad as above
>>$ perl6 --test -r
> All tests successful, 2 subtests skipped.
imcc seems not to produce valid PASM files for your environment in
most of the cases. Running them directly is ok.
Hhm - could you track
On 26 Sep 2002, Juergen Boemmels wrote:
> These may be nice but not needed for scheme
> * get keyed with INTVAL (getting direct to the Hashes)
> * set keyed with INTVAL;STRING
Both get(INTVAL;STRING) and set(INTVAL;STRING) are needed (or at least
useful) for accessing hidden lexicals in outer
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Working on this. If everyone wants to hash out the sort of semantics
> they're thinking about, we can probably get to closure reasonably fast
> and get things designed and implemented quickly.
My scheme implementation is a working (a little bit hacky bu
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>
> > At 5:05 PM +0200 9/26/02, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> > >
> > >perl t/harness
> > >t/builtins/array.Can't bless non-reference value at
> > >../../assemble.pl line 163.
> >
> > Hrm. What version of perl are
"Jonathan Sillito" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It would be nice if parrot provided the lexical scope semantics scheme (and
> other languages) needs rather than have each language implement their own. I
> guess this would be Dan's call, but just as another suggestion, could the
> lexical ops be
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 5:05 PM +0200 9/26/02, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> >
> >perl t/harness
> >t/builtins/array.Can't bless non-reference value at
> >../../assemble.pl line 163.
>
> Hrm. What version of perl are you running?
Doesn't matter (within reason). It's a 'mak
At 8:26 PM +0200 9/26/02, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
>On Thu 26 Sep 2002 18:14, Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> At 5:05 PM +0200 9/26/02, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
>> >
>> >perl t/harness
>> >t/builtins/array.Can't bless non-reference value at
>> >../../assemble.pl line 163.
>>
>> Hrm.
At 5:40 PM +0100 9/26/02, Peter Sinnott wrote:
>On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 12:14:46PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> At 5:05 PM +0200 9/26/02, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
>> >
>> >perl t/harness
>> >t/builtins/array.Can't bless non-reference value at
>> >../../assemble.pl line 163.
>>
>> Hrm.
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No it's not a reset thing. I should have documented it better, though i
> thought the wod "initial" would tell it ;-)
Well I was thinking of it as initial allocation versus reallocation.
> The intlist structur
On Thu 26 Sep 2002 18:14, Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 5:05 PM +0200 9/26/02, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> >
> >perl t/harness
> >t/builtins/array.Can't bless non-reference value at
> >../../assemble.pl line 163.
>
> Hrm. What version of perl are you running?
You should know that
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 07:25:09PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Do you have a working Perl6Grammar:
>
> $ perl6 -vwk -e'print qq(Hello parrot\n)'
> P6C '__eval__'
> .../imcc/imcc -verbose-o__eval__.pasm __eval__.imc
> Reading __eval__.imc
> using optimization '0'
> assembly module _
H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> a5:/pro/3gl/CPAN/parrot 116 > cat .timestamp
> 1033023609
> Thu Sep 26 07:00:09 2002 UTC
>
> (time of this cvs update)
> a5:/pro/3gl/CPAN/parrot 117 >
>
> parrot all OK
>
> perl t/harness
> t/builtins/array.Can't bless non-reference value at ../../assemble.pl line 1
Tom Hughes wrote:
> In message [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>#17549, 17569 intlist bugfix, speedup, test
> Applied.
Thanks again for all the checkins.
> One slight query I had was the meaning of the extra parameter added
> to intlist_new() by
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 12:14:46PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> At 5:05 PM +0200 9/26/02, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> >
> >perl t/harness
> >t/builtins/array.Can't bless non-reference value at
> >../../assemble.pl line 163.
>
> Hrm. What version of perl are you running?
Hi,
I just
At 5:05 PM +0200 9/26/02, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
>
>perl t/harness
>t/builtins/array.Can't bless non-reference value at
>../../assemble.pl line 163.
Hrm. What version of perl are you running?
--
Dan
--"it's like th
a5:/pro/3gl/CPAN/parrot 116 > cat .timestamp
1033023609
Thu Sep 26 07:00:09 2002 UTC
(time of this cvs update)
a5:/pro/3gl/CPAN/parrot 117 >
parrot all OK
perl t/harness
t/builtins/array.Can't bless non-reference value at ../../assemble.pl line 163.
# Failed test (t/builtins/array.t at
At 12:04 PM -0700 9/25/02, Jonathan Sillito wrote:
>It would be nice if parrot provided the lexical scope semantics scheme (and
>other languages) needs rather than have each language implement their own. I
>guess this would be Dan's call, but just as another suggestion, could the
>lexical ops be l
At 11:50 AM -0700 9/23/02, Jonathan Sillito wrote:
> > -Original Message-
>> From: Piers Cawley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> "Jonathan Sillito" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > get_counter:
>> > new_pad 1
>>
>> Doesn't this violate the 'caller saves' principle, making it hard to
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Tanton Gibbs wrote:
> What is annoying is that on my cygwin system, everytime I type make it
> rebuilds everything starting from Configure. It doesn't matter if I have
> touched anything or not. In other words
> perl Configure.pl && make
>
> will run Configure.pl twice.
Y
What is annoying is that on my cygwin system, everytime I type make it
rebuilds everything starting from Configure. It doesn't matter if I have
touched anything or not. In other words
perl Configure.pl && make
will run Configure.pl twice.
Very annoying.
Tanton
- Original Message -
Fro
On 26 Sep 2002, Tom Hughes wrote:
> Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > The problem here is that the rule in the Makefile that causes it to
> > > rerun Configure.pl if any of the Configure.pl generated files is out
> > > of date clashes with the recently introduced edit to
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 26 Sep 2002, Tom Hughes wrote:
>
> > The problem here is that the rule in the Makefile that causes it to
> > rerun Configure.pl if any of the Configure.pl generated files is out
> > of date clashes with the rec
On 26 Sep 2002, Tom Hughes wrote:
> > > #17517 build system, permanent Configure runs - annoying at least
> The problem here is that the rule in the Makefile that causes it to
> rerun Configure.pl if any of the Configure.pl generated files is out
> of date clashes with the recently introduced e
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> #17549, 17569 intlist bugfix, speedup, test
Applied.
One slight query I had was the meaning of the extra parameter added
to intlist_new() by this patch. I assume the idea is that you can call
it with a value of 0
Tom Hughes wrote:
> In message [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>#17353/17323 test for Parrot_sprintf
> Applied.
Thank you.
> ... The outstanding question here is anyop.h
> and anyop.c in languages/imcc as they are not built, and seem to have
> b
Steve Fink wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2002 at 11:44:11PM +0200, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>
>> or who applies what when and why or not? This questions arises
>>sometimes, so I'll ask.
>>If people don't have the time to look at it, it's ok. But then, it would
>>be fine, if I could checkin at le
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> #17353/17323 test for Parrot_sprintf
Applied.
I've also updated MANIFEST and the .cvsignore files to try and match
something approaching reality. The outstanding question here is anyop.h
and anyop.c in languages/
On Wed, Sep 25, 2002 at 11:44:11PM +0200, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> or who applies what when and why or not? This questions arises
> sometimes, so I'll ask.
>
> ...
>
> If people don't have the time to look at it, it's ok. But then, it would
> be fine, if I could checkin at least the imcc
In message <20020925234547$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Tanton Gibbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > #17517 build system, permanent Configure runs - annoying at least
>
> I wish someone would commit this one as this does fix a very annoying
> problem, especially on cygwin.
Applied.
The problem he
35 matches
Mail list logo
