On Tuesday 11 March 2008 21:59:03 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Modified:
>trunk/include/parrot/io.h
>trunk/src/io/io.c
>trunk/src/pmc/parrotio.pmc
>
> Log:
> Fix ParrotIO's clone()
> Add PIO_dup to dup an fd
> Add a set_pmc to ParrotIO
> chromatic++ pmichaud++ Infinoid++
Minor comments,
From: Andy Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 20:10:19 -0500
On Mar 11, 2008, at 8:08 PM, Bob Rogers wrote:
> 0xdeadbeef is odd, so it doesn't even have word alignment on
> byte-addressable machines. So you don't even have to check on most
> architectures. True?
On Mar 11, 2008, at 8:08 PM, Bob Rogers wrote:
0xdeadbeef is odd, so it doesn't even have word alignment on
byte-addressable machines. So you don't even have to check on most
architectures. True?
The word "most" frightens me.
--
Andy Lester => [EMAIL PROTECTED] => www.petdance.com => AIM:
From: Andy Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 20:01:07 -0500
On Mar 11, 2008, at 6:12 PM, Geoffrey Broadwell wrote:
> I'm confused here. My understanding of the difference between
> PARROT_ASSERT and the PARROT_ASSERT_POINTER suggestion is that the
> former check
On Mar 11, 2008, at 6:12 PM, Geoffrey Broadwell wrote:
I'm confused here. My understanding of the difference between
PARROT_ASSERT and the PARROT_ASSERT_POINTER suggestion is that the
former checks for truth, and the other would check for lack of obvious
insanity.
A pointer of 0 is always,
From: "Will Coleda" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 00:01:30 -0500
2008/3/10 Bob Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Yes, this is the "continuation barrier" issue. It's real, it's deep,
> and it's gonna require much more than a fix.
Is there an RT ticket open that addres
On Tue, 11 Mar 2008, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 05:48:54PM +0200, Peter Gibbs wrote:
> > There are two apparent solutions: check all notnull arguments before
> > calling the functions or remove the nonnull attribute where it is not
> > true.
>
> Or assert() every single on
# New Ticket Created by James Keenan
# Please include the string: [perl #51622]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=51622 >
Alberto Simões wrote:
> Hi
>
> Latest parrot version (r26311) is not detecting GMP inst
Alberto Simões wrote:
Hi
Latest parrot version (r26311) is not detecting GMP installed under
/opt/local/lib/libgmp* (default location for macports). If I remember it
correctly, previous versions detected it without any problem.
Alberto:
The only configuration step which makes specific ref
Check the output of ps when it hangs. I think Configure.pl might be
trying to run SVK, which is apparently included with 10.5.2, and if
you've never used SVK, it asks you to set it up and waits for some
input, which you can't see. I've had the same problem, it can be
worked around by runnin
On Tue, 2008-03-11 at 23:01 +0100, Ron Blaschke wrote:
> Andy Lester wrote:
> >
> > On Mar 11, 2008, at 2:43 PM, Ron Blaschke wrote:
> >
> >> It ties pointers to INTVALs, which I guess it shouldn't.
> >
> >
> > As I read the mail, it seems like the only problem we have is in casting
> > the po
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 05:48:54PM +0200, Peter Gibbs wrote:
> Looking at just this one case, we see that string_ord is called with a
> NULL s argument, whereas the function header states that s is nonnull.
> The GCC optimiser believes what it is told, and therefore discards the
> test for s be
Andy Lester wrote:
On Mar 11, 2008, at 2:43 PM, Ron Blaschke wrote:
It ties pointers to INTVALs, which I guess it shouldn't.
As I read the mail, it seems like the only problem we have is in casting
the pointer to an int to find its truthiness. I'd say use the !!(x) and
be done with it.
Am Dienstag, 11. März 2008 22:39 schrieb Ron Blaschke:
> > if (!x) \
There were of course some parens missing ...
if (!(x)) \
leo
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Am Dienstag, 11. März 2008 20:43 schrieb Ron Blaschke:
void
Parrot_assert(INTVAL condition, ARGIN(const char *condition_string),
ARGIN(const char *file), unsigned int line)
...
PARROT_ASSERT is used to assert pointers too, for example in src/string.c:
What abou
On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 08:29:04AM -0700, James Keenan via RT wrote:
> On Mon Mar 10 23:12:23 2008, kraai wrote:
>
> >
> > The final test in t/perl/Parrot_Test.t still fails for me. It's a TODO
> > test, so it can't use test_fail. The attached patch should handle all
> > versions of Test::Build
Am Dienstag, 11. März 2008 20:43 schrieb Ron Blaschke:
> void
> Parrot_assert(INTVAL condition, ARGIN(const char *condition_string),
> ARGIN(const char *file), unsigned int line)
> ...
>
> PARROT_ASSERT is used to assert pointers too, for example in src/string.c:
What about making Parrot_
On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 20:02:25 +
"Wim Vanderbauwhede" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've read "Parrot for small platforms" in pdd01_overview, it says
> "For small platforms, any parser, compiler, and optimizer modules are
> replaced with a small bytecode loader module which reads in Parrot
> byte
On Tuesday 11 March 2008 13:02:25 Wim Vanderbauwhede wrote:
> I would like to use Parrot on a "small platform" (embedded microprocessor
> system). The system would need a minimal parrot that should only run
> precompiled bytecode, nothing else, and it does not even need the PGE.
> But it should be
I would like to use Parrot on a "small platform" (embedded microprocessor
system). The system would need a minimal parrot that should only run
precompiled bytecode, nothing else, and it does not even need the PGE.
But it should be very small (say <250K). I compiled parrot --without almost
everythin
On Mar 11, 2008, at 2:43 PM, Ron Blaschke wrote:
It ties pointers to INTVALs, which I guess it shouldn't.
As I read the mail, it seems like the only problem we have is in
casting the pointer to an int to find its truthiness. I'd say use
the !!(x) and be done with it. The PARROT_ASSERT_
PARROT_ASSERT is currently defined as:
#ifdef NDEBUG
# define PARROT_ASSERT(x) ((void)0)
#else
# define PARROT_ASSERT(x) Parrot_assert((INTVAL)(x), #x, __FILE__,
__LINE__)
#endif
with
void
Parrot_assert(INTVAL condition, ARGIN(const char *condition_string),
ARGIN(const char *file),
James Keenan via RT wrote:
On Sat Jan 19 21:06:00 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is, surprisingly, the same bug as #49762; Tickets merged.
Friends,
Did this error persist with Parrot 5.3 on ppc/OS X 10.5.1?
Unfortunately for testing, I'm now at 10.5.2. Here are the results of my
testi
On Mon Mar 10 23:12:23 2008, kraai wrote:
>
> The final test in t/perl/Parrot_Test.t still fails for me. It's a TODO
> test, so it can't use test_fail. The attached patch should handle all
> versions of Test::Builder, but I've only tested it with version 0.32.
Patch applied in r26315. I'm usi
Hi
Latest parrot version (r26311) is not detecting GMP installed under
/opt/local/lib/libgmp* (default location for macports). If I remember it
correctly, previous versions detected it without any problem.
Cheers
ambs
--
Alberto Simões - Departamento de Informática - Universidade do Minho
Launched in r26309.
François, your fix to Lua in r26308 went in after I started working on
resolving conflicts in the merge, so I merged those changes after the
rest in r26310.
The pdd17pmc branch can now be considered dead.
Allison
Author: allison
Date: Tue Mar 11 02:50:21 2008
New Revision: 26309
Modified:
trunk/docs/pdds/draft/pdd04_datatypes.pod
trunk/docs/pdds/pdd17_pmc.pod
Changes in other areas also in this revision:
Added:
trunk/lib/Parrot/Pmc2c/Attribute.pm
- copied unchanged from r26307,
/branches/p
On Sun Mar 09 19:32:32 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Matt Kraai's contributions appear to have resolved the problem.
> t/perl/Parrot_Test.t has been passing for me and for reliable
> smoke-testers for the past week. So I am resolving this ticket.
The final test in t/perl/Parrot_Test.t still fa
28 matches
Mail list logo
