This week's summary

2004-09-26 Thread The Perl 6 Summarizer
The Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 2004-09-24 So, this is my last summary before I start my teaching practice. Hopefully I've got things set up so writing the summary isn't going to interfere with that, and vice versa. This week in perl6-compiler State of Rules Discussion of

Re: towards a new call scheme

2004-09-26 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Jeff Clites <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > return_cc ==> alias for call_cc_indexed 0 > tailcall ==> alias for call_cc_indexed 1 > call_cc_indexed 2 ==> invoke the continuation from 2 frames back, as > though it had been passed down Yep. I can imagine that that's avaiable as: $

[perl #31725] [TODO] non-branching compare opcodes - tests

2004-09-26 Thread via RT
# New Ticket Created by Leopold Toetsch # Please include the string: [perl #31725] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # http://rt.perl.org:80/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=31725 > I've moved these opcodes to ops.num and added some missing variants. These opcode

[perl #31726] [TODO] non-branching compare opcodes - JIT

2004-09-26 Thread via RT
# New Ticket Created by Leopold Toetsch # Please include the string: [perl #31726] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # http://rt.perl.org:80/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=31726 > The integer and number variants of these opcodes could need JIT support. Thanks,

Re: Why lexical pads

2004-09-26 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > my $i is register; > I See A Great Need. Well, the Perl6 notation is: my int $i; that even specifies, which kind of register is used. The caveat WRT continuation still applies. And such natural typed variables aren't stored in the lexical pad.