# New Ticket Created by Andy Bussey
# Please include the string: [perl #23322]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=23322
There may be a good reason that I don't know about
why 'make test' does not run the
# New Ticket Created by Lars Balker Rasmussen
# Please include the string: [perl #23326]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=23326
Just to fix some cvs up noise...
--
Lars Balker Rasmussen
On Thursday 14 August 2003 18:24, Mattia Barbon wrote:
Puts #ifdefs as per the rest of i386/jit_emit.h.
Regards
Mattia
Applied, Thanks.
Daniel.
Some notes about current PackFile status quo as of patch #8.
Short summary:
* Parrot can load a compiled bytecode file call a subroutine
in there and return back again. s. imcc/t/syn/file.t (#6)
How it works:
* A subroutine using Parrot Calling Conventions (PCC) has an entry
in the constant
Andy Bussey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There may be a good reason that I don't know about
why 'make test' does not run the IMCC tests, but if
not here's a patch.
No, there is no reason. But could you provide a patch for
config/gen/makefiles/root.in.
Cheers,
Andy Bussey
Thanks,
leo
Lars Balker Rasmussen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just to fix some cvs up noise...
Thanks, applied.
leo
Mattia Barbon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
the correct fix is probably having different code paths for Win32 (because
on Windows NT/2000/XP/.Net and funnier names of the future environment
is/will be Unicode, not char*). For now this makes env.t pass on Win32.
Thanks, applied.
leo
raise hell is working great
with the new find_lex exceptions. Thanks! :)
Any plans to to add pow for PMC's?
What about separate ops for floor/true division?
http://www.python.org/doc/2.2.1/whatsnew/node7.html
Sincerely,
Michal J Wallace
Sabren Enterprises, Inc.
D:\Perl\5.6.1\bin\MSWin32-x86-multi-thread\perl.exe
t/harness --gc-debug
--running-make-test
t/op/gcNOK 2# Failed test (t/op/gc.t at line 14)
# got: '1'
# expected: '0'
t/op/gcok 8/8# Looks like you failed 1 tests of 8.
t/op/gcdubious
Test returned
Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Arthur Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Arthur,
Hi,
If I execute a miniperl (but linked into parrot and with it's own
parrot interpreter) it works, but if the caller closes(STDERR) before
invoking miniperl no output is ever seen on
On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 04:22:36PM +0200, Juergen Boemmels wrote:
No STDERR should not let the init fail, but might set the handle to
PerlUndef. This is possible since the standard handles are PMCs
We keep using that 4 letter word.
How much s/Perl/Parrot/ig do we need before the entire
Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Some notes about current PackFile status quo as of patch #8.
Short summary:
* Parrot can load a compiled bytecode file call a subroutine
in there and return back again. s. imcc/t/syn/file.t (#6)
this is cool.
[...]
Missing:
* cleanup:
Michal Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
raise hell is working great
with the new find_lex exceptions. Thanks! :)
Welcome, and thanks for using, testing, feddback ...
Any plans to to add pow for PMC's?
Seems to be missing, ind pdd02 too.
What about separate ops for floor/true division?
Vladimir Lipskiy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I surmise that there is something which set up
interpreter-has_early_DOD_PMCs = 1
before the test runs.
Yep, probably the stdio PMCs. These (or better all) are inititalized
currently with:
PObj_needs_early_DOD_SET(pmc);
I've started a new job this week, and between finishing the last one and
getting this going it's changed my schedule rather a lot. Settling down,
though, so I should be in a position to at least trickle out mail again.
I'll be draining out the queue tonight and tomorrow morning (GMT-500 if
--- Bernhard Schmalhofer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I have started an implementation of m4 in PIR. See
http://www.gnu.org/software/m4/m4.html.
That is amazing!
The goal is to make a lot of tests work, and eventually getting a
drop
in replacement for GNU m4.
The plan is to
Juergen Boemmels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Some notes about current PackFile status quo as of patch #8.
Short summary:
* Parrot can load a compiled bytecode file call a subroutine
in there and return back again. s. imcc/t/syn/file.t (#6)
this is
Nicholas Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 04:22:36PM +0200, Juergen Boemmels wrote:
No STDERR should not let the init fail, but might set the handle to
PerlUndef. This is possible since the standard handles are PMCs
We keep using that 4 letter word.
How much
If you want to compile your .pbc to $(EXE) but you don't want
blib/lib/libparrot.a included in each one, you can do it by linking the
generated .o with blib/lib/libparrot.so (you can try make exec_so
EXEC=program_name but I'm unsure if it will work correctly)
In order to have this working you
On Fri, 15 Aug 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
When we have more classes like a Python hierarchy, we will see, how and
how far the functionality does match. If we find some, we can put in an
intermediate ParrotScalar.
I was thinking about this earlier today. Once dynamic
PMCs are working, Perl*
Brent Dax wrote:
TOGoS:
# When I say in IMCC:
#
# $P0 = $P1 + $P2
#
# , I expect it to create a new value and store it in
# $P0, not give me a segfault because I didn't say
#
# $P0 = new figure out what the heck type
# $P0 is supposed to be based
# on
In the second chunk of the patch [classes/env.pmc], what is free_it set
to if the else branch is taken? IOW, I think you should have free_it
initialized to 0 when you declare it.
In the last part of the patch [config/gen/platform/win32.c], why do you
set *free_it to 0 even when you return NULL?
Brent Dax wrote:
TOGoS:
# When I say in IMCC:
#
# $P0 = $P1 + $P2
#
# , I expect it to create a new value and
# store it in
# $P0, not give me a segfault because I didn't say
#
# $P0 = new figure out what the heck type
# $P0 is supposed to be based
#
On Fri, 15 Aug 2003, TOGoS wrote:
There may be something I'm missing, but I don't
understand why we need a keyed version of just
about every opcode.
It avoids having to create a lot of temporary PMCs with weird magic on
them, avoids having to create temporary PMCs in general, and allows the
From: Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 12:42:22 +0200
Kenneth Graves [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+| NEW { /*expect_pasm = 1;*/ }
I'd rather not mess around with PASM mode.
Patch welcome (if that's not possbile, I'll have a
# New Ticket Created by Andy Bussey
# Please include the string: [perl #23334]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=23334
Here's a revised patch to add the IMCC tests
to 'make test' and 'make fulltest' -
On Fri, 15 Aug 15, 2003 Dan Sugalski wrote:
On Fri, 15 Aug 2003, TOGoS wrote:
There may be something I'm missing, but I don't
understand why we need a keyed version of just
about every opcode.
It avoids having to create a lot of temporary PMCs with weird
magic on them, avoids
Togos [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... a bit strange that there is a keyed version
of 'add', anyway.
What is that? I'd tossed all (hopefully) of the math, boolean, and
logical keyed vtables, for which we never want to have opcodes. Did I
miss one?
Ah yes - docu needs updating, but Dan didn't put
Benjamin Goldberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... I'd rather have two versions of add, one
with set/create semantics and the other with assign/mutate semantics.
As already outlined, this leads to some kind of duplicating of our
opcodes, vtables, penalty on JIT implementators and so on. We (/me)
Kenneth Graves wrote:
From: Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 12:42:22 +0200
Kenneth Graves [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+| NEW { /*expect_pasm = 1;*/ }
I'd rather not mess around with PASM mode.
Patch welcome (if that's not
How does one call a parrot Sub from C and get the return value(s)? Is
it even possible, given CPS, to do this generally? If not, how can I
check when it is?
Thanks,
Luke
Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
How does one call a parrot Sub from C and get the return value(s)?
I'd vote for stuffing args into the interpreter, calling the sub's
invoke() method, then digging through the registers to pull out the
return values (see e.g. Parrot_pop_argv in
--- Sean O'Rourke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
How does one call a parrot Sub from
C and get the
I'd vote for stuffing args into the
interpreter, calling the sub's invoke()
method, then digging through the registers
to pull out the return values (see
33 matches
Mail list logo
