Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 3:13 PM -0500 12/22/02, Will Coleda wrote:
I recently (re) posted my stab at tcl. I quickly realized that I was
very out of date with the current development path. Here's a copy that
works with (nearly) cvs latest, and switches to imcc as the output
instead of directly
At 8:57 PM + 12/23/02, Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Mon, Dec 23, 2002 at 01:37:18PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 1:50 PM + 12/22/02, Leopold Toetsch (via RT) wrote:
>Here is another approach, to finally unify the marking routines:
>- next_for_GC remains what it is
>- instead of current_e
At 3:13 PM -0500 12/22/02, Will Coleda wrote:
I recently (re) posted my stab at tcl. I quickly realized that I was
very out of date with the current development path. Here's a copy
that works with (nearly) cvs latest, and switches to imcc as the
output instead of directly to pasm.
Cool. As I k
On Mon, Dec 23, 2002 at 01:37:18PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 1:50 PM + 12/22/02, Leopold Toetsch (via RT) wrote:
> >Here is another approach, to finally unify the marking routines:
> >- next_for_GC remains what it is
> >- instead of current_end_of_list and a return value, mark_used() uuse
At 9:42 PM + 12/22/02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (via RT) wrote:
This patch creates a new function string_destroy(),
as described in docs/strings.pod,
and motivated by TODO item
grep docs/strings.pod for unimplemented functions and implement them
Hrm, we need to fix that file. strings shouldn't
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002 09:19:46 +, Nicholas Clark wrote:
>Is the tendra compiler free? I've tried to find it before, but couldn't
>manage to get a functional download URL.
Note: all the info below is summarized from the project web
pages; I have no personal experience with TenDRA.
The original
At 1:50 PM + 12/22/02, Leopold Toetsch (via RT) wrote:
Here is another approach, to finally unify the marking routines:
- next_for_GC remains what it is
- instead of current_end_of_list and a return value, mark_used() uuses
a file static mark_ptr. As we don't have recursive DOD runs, this
