Bob Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From: "Matt Diephouse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 20:21:32 -0400
Bob Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Try the attached patch . . .
That *does* work. I haven't applied it because it's not
necessarily urgent that Tcl w
The attached patch creates a C in C for
the exclusive use of the C ops. There is a minor boost in
functionality (i.e. C and C no longer have to nest
with respect to C and C because the patch gives them different
stacks), but the real reason for wanting to do this is to get the return
addresses
From: "Matt Diephouse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 20:21:32 -0400
Bob Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Try the attached patch . . .
That *does* work. I haven't applied it because it's not
necessarily urgent that Tcl work in trunk. I'm okay with
waiting a
Bob Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Try the attached patch. If it works, then we have a problem, because
here's the original comment (which I deleted) that went with this line
of code:
/*
* During interpreter creation there is an initial context
* and th
From: Bob Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 17:43:28 -0400
From: "Matt Diephouse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 16:56:44 -0400
Unfortunately, this patch breaks Tcl. There seems to be some bug with
exceptions.
Here's the Tcl used fo
From: "Matt Diephouse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 16:56:44 -0400
Unfortunately, this patch breaks Tcl. There seems to be some bug with
exceptions.
Here's the Tcl used for this example:
proc test {} {uplevel #0 {append}}
test
Hmm. I seem to have brok
Bob Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From: Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 11:53:36 +0200
Am Montag, 18. September 2006 03:56 schrieb Bob Rogers:
>The attached patch consolidates most of the existing stack-unwinding
> code into Continuation:invoke;
From: Jerry Gay (via RT) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 14:38:40 -0700
# New Ticket Created by Jerry Gay
# Please include the string: [perl #40392]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id
Am Samstag, 23. September 2006 09:44 schrieb chromatic:
> Tests 14 and 15 in t/examples/shootout.t fail on Linux/PPC because
> jit_set_args_pc does not handle floating point arguments correctly. I
> poked at the code a little bit, but PPC is different enough with its
> relative wealth of registers
chromatic wrote:
> Tests 14 and 15 in t/examples/shootout.t fail on Linux/PPC because
> jit_set_args_pc does not handle floating point arguments correctly. I poked
> at the code a little bit, but PPC is different enough with its relative
> wealth of registers that I couldn't fix things triviall
Tests 14 and 15 in t/examples/shootout.t fail on Linux/PPC because
jit_set_args_pc does not handle floating point arguments correctly. I poked
at the code a little bit, but PPC is different enough with its relative
wealth of registers that I couldn't fix things trivially. (I'm not even sure
I
11 matches
Mail list logo
