On Friday 26 October 2007 20:57:25 James Keenan via RT wrote:
I've come to my point in the writing of unit tests for the config step
classes that I'm about to turn to this step. If user-interactivity is
not appropriate for this step, I could reformulate it as an 'auto' step.
While it may be
Applied, thanks! (r22519)
Patch applied to trunk in r22520. Resolving ticket.
On Sun Oct 21 13:25:50 2007, ptc wrote:
On Thu Mar 15 19:12:48 2007, ptc wrote:
splint spews many many errors by default. Take a look at the
Makefile that perl5 has for the start of some rules that Andy worked
on for the perl5 code.
Andy Lester has done a very large amount of work on
Name of ticket changed to reflect change from 'inter' to 'auto' type of
configuration step in r22520.
On Fri Jun 08 06:44:29 2007, ptc wrote:
In the file config/inter/lex.pm there is the following todo item:
# XXX should --ask be handled like the other user defines or
checked for
# version requirements?
A decision needs to be made as to how to handle the --ask option, and
then
In http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=43172, we discussed
the fact that in configuration step class inter::pmc, the code for
prompting the user to select among pmc's was, in effect, turned off
because we weren't sure that it was advisable, at this point in time, to
permit users to
On Tue Oct 02 13:39:30 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Parrot is no longer licensed under the GPL directly (though it is
available under the GPL through the Artistic 2.0). Update or remove
references to the GPL license in these files:
debian/copyright:45
Removed mention of some
On Saturday 27 October 2007 08:25:57 Paul Cochrane via RT wrote:
languages/regex/lib/Regex/Grammar.pm:
(c) Copyright 1998-2001 Francois Desarmenien, all rights reserved.
This file is automatically generated. So what do we do with files in
such cases? It is generated from Parse::Yapp, so
On Saturday 27 October 2007 07:43:26 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Modified: trunk/editor/pasm.el
===
=== --- trunk/editor/pasm.el (original)
+++ trunk/editor/pasm.el Sat Oct 27 07:43:24 2007
@@ -1,7 +1,9 @@
The patch attached significantly improves the test coverage of
configuration step class auto::msvc. To make this class more testable,
the guts of its runstep() method have been refactored out into two
subroutines
The first is a subroutine, _probe_for_msvc(), which wraps around the
construction
On Oct 27, 2007, at 10:52 AM, James Keenan via RT wrote:
In http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=43172, we
discussed
the fact that in configuration step class inter::pmc, the code for
prompting the user to select among pmc's was, in effect, turned off
because we weren't sure
My recommedation is that we do here what we did in inter::pmc, viz.,
eliminate the prompting code and change this class from inter::ops to
auto::ops.
Any objection?
None whatsoever, have at it.
r22530: Module refactored and renamed; corresponding test file renamed.
Coverage is
http://www.perlfoundation.org/parrot/index.cgi?fixing_gc_bugs
Thanks to chromatic for the how-to lesson in #parrot; Turned this
into a wiki page. ShareAndEnjoyTheWiki.
--
Will Coke Coleda
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
# New Ticket Created by chromatic
# Please include the string: [perl #46961]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=46961
$ prove t/configure/117-inter_shlibs-0*.t
t/configure/117-inter_shlibs-01ok
Author: allison
Date: Sat Oct 27 21:22:00 2007
New Revision: 22543
Modified:
trunk/docs/pdds/draft/pdd19_pir.pod
Log:
[pdd] Solifidifying PDD 19 coverage on macros and .pcc_* directives.
Modified: trunk/docs/pdds/draft/pdd19_pir.pod
On Mon Oct 01 21:21:42 2007, kjs wrote:
Is it still necessary to prefix these
directives with pcc_ (as it is the only calling conventions)? Other
directives such as .yield and .return also use the PCC, but do
not have this prefix. This difference seems arbitrary and inconsistent
I just checked in a revised version of the PIR PDD. The most notable
changes are to the macro syntax and to the .pcc_* directives.
At this point I've finished my review, and it's ready for a general
review. Comments and suggestions welcome.
Thanks to smash and KJS for putting this together!
18 matches
Mail list logo
