K Stol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: "Leopold Toetsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> The C can happen deeply inside some called subs. The exception
>> can be caught e.g. in main, to do some cleanup before really shutting
>> down. Makes sense to me.
> You've got a point there. But it's a bit a matt
K Stol writes:
> From: "Leopold Toetsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > The C can happen deeply inside some called subs. The exception
> > can be caught e.g. in main, to do some cleanup before really shutting
> > down. Makes sense to me.
>
> You've got a point there. But it's a bit a matter of taste I th
Benjamin Goldberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>class freezer {
>class thawer {
>class cloner {
[ big snip ]
Do you expect that these are overridden by some languages using parrot?
I.e. that ponie tries to implement a freezer that writes output for
Storable?
Further: having clone imple
- Original Message -
From: "Jos Visser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Leopold Toetsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "P6I" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, August 29, 2003 4:35 AM
Subject: Re: [CVS ci] exit opcode
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2003 at 01:29:18PM +0200 it came to pass that Leopold
Toetsch wrot
- Original Message -
From: "Leopold Toetsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "K Stol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2003 5:27 PM
Subject: Re: [CVS ci] exit opcode
> K Stol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > From: "Leopold Toetsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> But
- Original Message -
From: "Leopold Toetsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "K Stol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2003 7:43 AM
Subject: Re: [CVS ci] exit opcode
> K Stol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > From: "Leopold Toetsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> .
K Stol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: "Leopold Toetsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> .pcc_sub _main prototyped # only one "_main" allowed like in C
> This is not *that* ugly, just look at C, for example. Any C program should
> have a "main", so
> it's not that strange to have a special 'purpose s
K Stol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: "Leopold Toetsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> But with the constant Sub PMC in the packfile execution could start
>> at "_main" then.
> I couldn't follow the constant Sub PMC thread (didn't understand, maybe a
> WTHI subject?).
The PIR assembler inside Parrot
- Original Message -
From: "Leopold Toetsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "K Stol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2003 4:52 AM
Subject: Re: [CVS ci] exit opcode
> K Stol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > $I0 = 0#
> >
On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 07:26:25PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>
> How does it work? Simple. When a watched resource does what we're
> watching for (it changes, an entry is deleted, an entry is added [...]
Only after the action being watched is performed I presume.
Any implementation details? (m
K Stol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> $I0 = 0#
> .pcc_begin_return#
> .return $I0; # return 0; /* return to
> shell */
> .pcc_end_return # }
> .end
> Just an idea.
Good one. So in "main"
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>
> Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > -#define PMC_sub(pmc) ((parrot_sub_t)((pmc)->cache.pmc_val))
> > +#define PMC_sub(pmc) (*((parrot_sub_t *)&((pmc)->cache.pmc_val)))
>
> This seems to work. Thanks for the patch.
> (the tcc tinderbox seems to be missing a m
Nicholas Clark wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2003 at 05:30:37PM +0200, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>> I think, we need a general solution for freeze, dump and clone. As
>> shown
>
> I don't know if this is relevant here, but I'll mention it in case.
> For perl5 there isn't a single good generic clone sys
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>
> Benjamin Goldberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Actually, I think the following interface would be better:
>
> >void freeze(PMC *freezer);
> >void thaw (PMC *thawer);
>
> I'm thinking of (in horrible pseudo code ;-):
[snip]
> Above functionality does IMHO mat
14 matches
Mail list logo
