On Oct 30, 2005, at 1:54, Nick Glencross wrote:
Quick question...
I've been looking through inter_run and extend to see how to pass
arguments to a parrot method/function from C, but all the prototypes
that I've seen have '...' or 'va_list' to accept the arguments.
If I don't know what the
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
On Oct 30, 2005, at 1:54, Nick Glencross wrote:
Quick question...
I've been looking through inter_run and extend to see how to pass
arguments to a parrot method/function from C, but all the prototypes
that I've seen have '...' or 'va_list' to accept the arguments.
# New Ticket Created by Bernhard Schmalhofer
# Please include the string: [perl #37563]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=37563
Hi,
it looks like recent PGE changes broke 'Parrot m4'.
I have boiled it
Nick Glencross wrote:
Hmmm. still don't think that's what I want. Obviously this is in the
context of the NCI callback stuff that I'm looking into -- no surprises
there.
Ah callbacks again. As these are called by C code, you really should not
a function signature at compile-time.
In case
I've committed the next major step of switching to variable-sized
register frames.
Actually now almost all[1] register frames are variable-sized. It still
needs more cleanup, but the basics are working now. There are still some
NUM_REGISTERS around and the register allocator doesn't yet use
Nick Glencross wrote:
Guys,
As mentioned on the list yesterday I started evaluating ffcall as a
way of providing NCI functionality.
Ok, here's an updated version with (hopefully) working callbacks -- at
least enough for a POC.
If you tried out my previous version, run 'rm */*ffcall*'
# New Ticket Created by Kevin Tew
# Please include the string: [perl #37569]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=37569
Compiler Warnings Patch
Index: src/dod.c
Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 24, 2005, at 0:07, Jonathan Worthington wrote:
Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
op result_count(out INT)# TODO or some such
I'm guessing TODO means it's not done yet? But I was wondering, would
a more general solution not be
Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 27, 2005, at 7:27, Will Coleda (via RT) wrote:
But if I try this from languages/tcl, I get:
../../parrot -o foo.pbc foo.pir
../../parrot -o bar.pbc bar.pir
../../pbc_merge -o whee.pbc foo.pbc bar.pbc
Couldn't load 'tcl_group': unknown reason
Joshua Hoblitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 11:49:33PM +0100, Jonathan Worthington wrote:
If people have free time to spend on configure stuff, might it not be
better spent working on the real configure system that we want to have
(e.g. a set of makefiles for each platform
Kevin Tew (via RT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Compiler Warnings Patch
Thanks, applied (r9659).
Jonathan
On Oct 30, 2005, at 4:06 PM, Jonathan Worthington wrote:
Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 27, 2005, at 7:27, Will Coleda (via RT) wrote:
But if I try this from languages/tcl, I get:
../../parrot -o foo.pbc foo.pir
../../parrot -o bar.pbc bar.pir
../../pbc_merge -o whee.pbc
On Sun, Oct 30, 2005 at 09:13:31PM -, Jonathan Worthington wrote:
One would certainly hope so. :-) I guess this approach can work if the
code produced by the Perl 5 compiler only contains the subset of Parrot
functionality that MiniParrot can handle.
The constraint can be pushed higher
On Fri, October 28, 2005 2:22 pm, Nick Glencross said:
Guys,
As mentioned on the list yesterday I started evaluating ffcall as a way
of providing NCI functionality.
http://www.haible.de/bruno/packages-ffcall.html
I am a SWIG (www.swig.org) developer, and I recently started looking at
what
14 matches
Mail list logo
