Matt Fowles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All~
I just ran a completely clean checkout, configure, nmake, nmake test on
Win2K. It passed most tests and had fewer warning then previously.
Here are the errors that did occur...
Hope someone finds this useful,
Thanks, it is.
From: Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 12:04 PM
PMC (in gdb speak):
b dod.c:525
r t/pmc/pmc_61.pasm
p *(PMC *) b
p *((PMC *) b)-vtable
c
...
Umm .. the problem is that this pmc doesn't have the vtable;
(*((PMC *)b)).vtable points to a block
t\pmc\pmc...NOK 62# Failed test (t\pmc\pmc.t at line
1497)
# got: 'All names and ids ok.
# Can't spawn .\parrot.exe --gc-debug -b t\pmc\pmc_62.pasm: Bad file
descripto
r at lib/Parrot/Test.pm line 62.
I've no clue, what's going on here. Does the test-file exist
On Thu, 27 Nov 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
JüRgen BöMmels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+TOUCH = $(PERL) -e ${PQ}open(A,qq{$$_}) or die foreach @ARGV${PQ}
Well done. *But* this f*cking command does still not update time stamps.
Is this a Perl5 failure? Anyway, we need a (golfy) touch
Vladimir Lipsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Umm .. the problem is that this pmc doesn't have the vtable;
(*((PMC *)b)).vtable points to a block of memory which belonged
to the child interpreter's pool and has already been freed, I deduce
from examining the adresses. So it ends up with Access
Andy Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can think of one other potential problem: What if the user wants to
mount the source read-only? Last I checked, except for this issue, it was
possible to do so. For perl5, this ability was often requested.
We are generating all kinds of files
On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Andy Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can think of one other potential problem: What if the user wants to
mount the source read-only? Last I checked, except for this issue, it was
possible to do so. For perl5, this ability was often
I'm working on objects this morning--I need 'em, so they've become
unavoidable. (boo!) So, anyway, here are a few design decision things.
*) While we've facilities for a method cache, I'm ducking that for
now. I expect performance to suck rocks until that's undone, but to
do it right requires
# New Ticket Created by Adam Thomason
# Please include the string: [perl #24579]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org:80/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=24579
This attached patch adds support for OpenBSD 3.4 (which uses ELF), without
On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 08:58:53PM +, Adam Thomason wrote:
# New Ticket Created by Adam Thomason
# Please include the string: [perl #24579]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org:80/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=24579
This
From: Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 5:47 PM
Which child interpreter? Parrot_destroy_vtable() is called after
free_unused_pobjects().
Okay. I'll try to reword the problem all over again.
Well you know test 61 in t/pmc/pmc.t causes a segfault. To get things
From: Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 9:53 PM
*) I've made the Parrot_base_vtable array movable again, as it needs
to be resized. This is a temporary hack, since there are horrible
threading issues here. (Not to mention the fact that this table is
global and
I've been hard pressed to find any examples of proper exception-raising
with Parrot - reading back through the list in June/July I see that there
was some starts at implementing various exception related bits - has this
been at least semi-completed?
Hi Pete,
Looks like what you really need is a good way for IMC to handle:
1) Globals
2) Package (or file local) variables
3) Class definitions (with class locals or fields)
All of these are planned, right now the only equivalent to 'local int a'
in your code sample is a global variable.
However, if giving up IMCC's register allocator is worth gaining
the extra control of PASM, by all means do it, however I'm all ears
on suggestions for IMCC for features. *hint*
In that case, I don't suppose it would be possible for IMCC to allow
function calls in an if expr goto LABEL
At 01:14 PM 11/27/2003 -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 5:38 PM + 11/27/03, Pete Lomax wrote:
On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 09:52:10 -0500, Melvin Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 12:02 PM 11/27/2003 +, Pete Lomax wrote:
Perl6 already does interpolation without special support from IMCC.
I'll
At 08:10 PM 12/1/2003 -0700, Cory Spencer wrote:
However, if giving up IMCC's register allocator is worth gaining
the extra control of PASM, by all means do it, however I'm all ears
on suggestions for IMCC for features. *hint*
In that case, I don't suppose it would be possible for IMCC to
At 5:38 PM + 11/27/03, Pete Lomax wrote:
At 12:02 PM 11/27/2003 +, Pete Lomax wrote:
Perl6 already does interpolation without special support from IMCC.
I'll rephrase. Is there anything knocking about which would help with
eg:
printf (pFile, Amount %12.3f [%-10.10s]\n,balance,name);
Also,
At 10:40 AM 11/28/2003 +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
As outlined some time ago, when ops.num made it into the core, we need fix
assigned PMC class enums too. (Changed class enums invalidate existing PBC
files).
1) lib/Parrot/PMC.pm is the canonical source of PMC class = enum mapping.
2) the
On Dec 1, 2003, at 8:11 AM, Andy Dougherty wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Andy Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can think of one other potential problem: What if the user wants
to
mount the source read-only? Last I checked, except for this issue,
it was
possible to do
20 matches
Mail list logo
