Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 10:33 AM +0200 6/24/03, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
I've added a check for too deeply nested stacks now.
I probably ought to get started on the stack-chunk-as-PMC patch for
garbage collection of stack frames. :)
The first question is:
Do we need such a limit check on the regi
At 10:33 AM +0200 6/24/03, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Clinton A. Pierce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Found the bug. Mostly MEA CULPA. A thousand pardons to the good
Parrot folk.
When calling a sub like this:
.arg 0
call _foo
It's probably a good thing to take the 0 off the s
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 04:15:35PM +, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> This patch is necessary to get parrot to build with perl 5.00503 -- the
> mode argument to mkdir() wasn't optional back then. I'd apply it
> myself, but cvs doesn't seem to like me today, and I'm tired of
> fighting it. (My login a
At 8:53 AM -0400 6/23/03, Piers Cawley wrote:
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Okay, now that we're well on our way to getting sub/method/whatever
calling down and working, I want to point us towards what I'm thinking
of for exceptions.
Exception handlers really strike me as anonymous
Piers Cawley:
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Exception handlers really strike me as anonymous lexically scoped
> subroutines that get called with just one parameter--the exception
> object.
So, we grab another register for 'current exception continuation'?
Then when code throws an exce
On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 04:04:29PM +0100, Andrew Wilson wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 07:58:32AM -0700, David Storrs wrote:
> > /me shows ignorance yet again.
> >
> > For those of us who are not hardware types...what is "the new
> > machine"? The Itanium? Does that really have enough market
>
On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 07:58:32AM -0700, David Storrs wrote:
> /me shows ignorance yet again.
>
> For those of us who are not hardware types...what is "the new
> machine"? The Itanium? Does that really have enough market
> penetration at this point to be a worthy target? Or is the idea that,
>
On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 06:14:52AM -0700, Sean O'Rourke wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> >
> > [...] Nobody answered, if we need another
> > Sub class implementing the old invoke/ret scheme ...
>
> I'd say "no". P6C is now compiling to an obsolete architecture.
> While we sh
Sean O'Rourke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ... Rather, someone (me) needs to port
> P6C to the new machine.
Which is currently not quite possible. Someone (me;-) has to implement
imcc/docs/calling_conventions first - adopted for CPS. I'd rather not
have the HL spit out all registers according to
On Tue, 24 Jun 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > He's worried that the P6C tests
> > break,
>
> ... albeit this is still an issue. Nobody answered, if we need another
> Sub class implementing the old invoke/ret scheme ...
I'd say "no". P6C is now c
Looks good, except that this needs to make sure an int is being
returned, e.g.
+"42"-> 42
+"forty-two" -> 0
The lazy man in me would just shove it through an int reg, but that
loses precision if we go to bignums. Though for the moment I can't
think of a better way.
# New Ticket Created by Bernhard Schmalhofer
# Please include the string: [perl #22765]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=22765 >
Hi,
when playing with the stuff in 'languages/perl6', I noticed that code like
# New Ticket Created by Andy Dougherty
# Please include the string: [perl #22762]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=22762 >
This patch is necessary to get parrot to build with perl 5.00503 -- the
mode argument
Clinton A. Pierce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Found the bug. Mostly MEA CULPA. A thousand pardons to the good Parrot folk.
> When calling a sub like this:
> .arg 0
> call _foo
> It's probably a good thing to take the 0 off the stack at some
> point.
Thanks again for your b
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> More CPS shenanigans
> I get the strong feeling that Leo Tötsch isn't entirely happy with the
> new Continuation Passing Style regime.
No, I'm really happy with CPS. Restoring the whole context by invoke'ing
the return continuation is a very ele
15 matches
Mail list logo
