[perl #59940] [patch] convert perl tests to parrot

On Thu Oct 23 01:38:59 2008, mgrimes wrote: > Christoph, > > Thanks for your help. This has been a great, low intensity, way to > learn a bit of parrot. > I think I have addressed everything, and I have attached a new patch. > > > The patch no longer applies cleanly to objects.t, and I thought >

[perl #59686] [CAGE] Review t/pmc/ro.t - improve error testing

On Tue Oct 07 06:53:58 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > In fixing the Complex PMC in r31749, I revealed a problem in our > read-only PMC tests. In t/pmc/ro.t, test 5 gets an error as expected, > but the error it gets complains that add_p_ic_p doesn't exist (it hasn't > existed for years, if ever

[perl #59940] [patch] convert perl tests to parrot

On Thu Oct 16 17:43:28 2008, mgrimes wrote: > Hi, > > The attached patch converts two perl based tests into parrot tests: > > t/pmc/string.t > t/pmc/objects.t > > Each of these included "pir_error_is" type tests. I am not aware of > any way to test those within parrot right now, so I kept th

[perl #52778] [RFC] Are resizable arrays too Perlish?

On Sun Sep 14 13:43:15 2008, cotto wrote: > On Sun Sep 14 07:47:34 2008, pmichaud wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 12:41:42AM -0700, Christoph Otto via RT wrote: > > > > > > I got impatient and committed this as r31101. I'm marking this > > ticket >

[perl #44457] [TODO] make sure files match test files for DYNPMCs and DYNOPs etc

On Mon Oct 13 07:31:30 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi Christoph, > > I send you the patch atached. > > The script with TODO block works equal without it(with TODO > gives more information and adds the "not yet implemented" leyend). > > Sincerely, > > Igor Hi Igor, This patch looks good.

[perl #52478] [BUG] unwanted string -> int conversion for array-like PMCs

On Tue Apr 08 19:11:10 2008, pmichaud wrote: > On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 02:15:26PM -0700, Christoph Otto (Volt) wrote: > > When running the following PIR code, Parrot does the Perlish thing > > and implicitly converts s to an int. This violates the principle > > of least surprise and makes it unn

[perl #59782] [PATCH] add pmc_cmp VTABLE function

On Sat Oct 11 05:07:25 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Christoph Otto (via RT) wrote: > > > > In response to a question about comparison operators in Pipp*, > Allison > > suggested that I add a variant cmp VTABLE function which returns a > PMC instead > > of a

[perl #59340] t/stm/runtime_4.pir segfaults on FreeBSD 7 (i386)

On Thu Sep 25 15:09:30 2008, geraud wrote: > I reported a problem on IRC yesterday and was prompted to file a bug. >So here we go. The GeJ reports that this test is passing now so I'm marking this ticket resolved.

[perl #59336] [BUG] Parrot fails integer comparisons when integers are > 2^31 apart

On Thu Sep 25 14:18:40 2008, julianalbo wrote: > > I suspect the problem is that the integer "greater than" operation > > is performing a subtraction between the two (signed long) values > > being compared, but the result of the subtraction is outside of > > the range of signed longs. > > Correct.

[perl #50908] [CAGE] gcc -Werror=declaration-after-statement

On Wed Sep 24 10:47:16 2008, cotto wrote: > On Mon Feb 18 18:07:43 2008, coke wrote: > > On Feb 18, 2008 8:39 PM, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Friday 15 February 2008 11:35:04 Will Coleda wrote: > > > > > > > According to http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/index.html#DIR, looks like > >

[perl #50908] [CAGE] gcc -Werror=declaration-after-statement

On Mon Feb 18 18:07:43 2008, coke wrote: > On Feb 18, 2008 8:39 PM, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Friday 15 February 2008 11:35:04 Will Coleda wrote: > > > > > According to http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/index.html#DIR, looks like > > > as of gcc 4.2.3 (but not 4.1.2), we can use the f

[perl #46677] [TODO] [C] Merge fixedbooleanarray.pmc with functions from BigInt PMC

On Mon Oct 22 09:47:52 2007, pcoch wrote: > In src/pmc/fixedbooleanarray.pmc there is the todo item; > > * TODO merge this with functions from BigInt PMC > > The functionality in this file should be merged with that in the BigInt PMC I propose to reject this ticket. Reducing code duplication is

[perl #57728] [TODO] avoid 2038 bug if we haven't already.

On Thu Aug 07 14:20:11 2008, coke wrote: > Open a ticket for TODO item. > > -- Forwarded message -- > From: jerry gay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 4:34 PM > Subject: Re: time op inconsistent on Win32 > To: Ron Blaschke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: Jonathan Worthingt

[perl #58796] [CAGE] src/library.c (and others?) refer to .past files, which are no longer used

On Fri Sep 12 10:06:01 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > src/library.c (and others?) refer to .past files, which are no longer > used. remove all references to this filetype from the parrot repo. > ~jerry This one should be closeable as of r31284. I tried acking through all instances of the strin

[perl #58866] calling a PIR sub with 206 params segfaults parrot

On Thu Sep 18 08:52:10 2008, julianalbo wrote: > I changed the fix in r31230 to allocate char instead of char *, > adjusted the formula for buffer size and added a comment explaining it > to lower the level of black magic, and added a check for each item, > dropping the XXX comment that asked for i

[perl #45909] [TODO] Replace quadratic search with something linear in find_exception_handler()

On Wed Sep 17 16:57:06 2008, cotto wrote: > On Mon Oct 01 10:40:33 2007, pcoch wrote: > > In src/exceptions.c there is the todo comment: [TODO: replace > > quadratic search with something linear, hopefully without trashing > > abstraction layers > > > I can't find this comment any more, nor any o

[perl #45909] [TODO] Replace quadratic search with something linear in find_exception_handler()

On Mon Oct 01 10:40:33 2007, pcoch wrote: > In src/exceptions.c there is the todo comment: [TODO: replace > quadratic search with something linear, hopefully without trashing > abstraction layers I can't find this comment any more, nor any occurrence of this ticket's number. I'll do some digging

[perl #58866] calling a PIR sub with 206 params segfaults parrot

On Wed Sep 17 08:31:26 2008, particle wrote: > On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 11:45 PM, Christoph Otto via RT > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Tue Sep 16 15:00:24 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> On Tuesday 16 September 2008 14:47:58 NotFound wrote: > >> >

[perl #54110] [BUG] segfault in infix/n_infix with string arguments

On Tue Sep 09 15:06:38 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Patrick R. Michaud wrote: > > > > Just for clarification: IIUC, the n_* opcodes and their semantics > > aren't really "going away" -- they're simply being renamed to not > > have the leading "n_" prefix. It's the existing "add", "sub", >

[perl #41291] [RFC] Can't use null PMC with :multi sub

On Thu Jan 18 14:14:30 2007, mdiep wrote: > On Thu Jan 18 13:52:33 2007, leo wrote: > > While that was never actually specced, I do consider a NULL PMC as > > something > > like a null pointer in C. Any access (except testing for NULL-ness) > to > > it is > > an error. Above example tests, that som

[perl #58866] calling a PIR sub with 206 params segfaults parrot

On Tue Sep 16 15:00:24 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Tuesday 16 September 2008 14:47:58 NotFound wrote: > > > > It certainly shouldn't segfault. But, the question is: why does it > > > segfault at 206 parameters? Throwing an exception to avoid an > error we > > > don't understand isn't good

[perl #53536] [PATCH] sub-second sleep precision for non-threaded architectures

On Mon Sep 15 20:08:38 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > chromatic wrote: > > On Monday 15 September 2008 01:25:15 Christoph Otto via RT wrote: > > > >> It applies with a little noise to the current trunk and passes make > >> test. The attached version just

[perl #52778] [RFC] Are resizable arrays too Perlish?

On Thu Sep 11 23:15:50 2008, cotto wrote: > On Mon Sep 08 22:54:28 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Patrick R. Michaud wrote: > > > > > > Fixing this shouldn't be all that difficult -- in particular, > > > I think that src/pmc/resizablepmcarray.pmc lines 205-206 should > > > be changed from > > >

[perl #49722] [CAGE] Add Tests for SchedulerMessage PMC

On Sun Jan 13 05:38:42 2008, coke wrote: > > > -- > Will "Coke" Coleda > > On Jan 12, 2008, at 7:33 PM, chromatic (via RT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > wrote: > > > # New Ticket Created by chromatic > > # Please include the string: [perl #49722] > > # in the subject line of all future corresponden

[perl #52778] [RFC] Are resizable arrays too Perlish?

On Mon Sep 08 22:54:28 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Patrick R. Michaud wrote: > > > > Fixing this shouldn't be all that difficult -- in particular, > > I think that src/pmc/resizablepmcarray.pmc lines 205-206 should > > be changed from > > > > - if (key >= PMC_int_val(SELF)) > > -

[perl #44457] [TODO] make sure files match test files for DYNPMCs and DYNOPs etc

On Mon Aug 06 06:08:54 2007, pcoch wrote: > In the file t/distro/test_file_coverage.t there is the todo item: > > # TODO: DYNPMC, DYNOPS, etc > > This is in the context of making sure that the files match the test > files. This needs to be implemented. Is this as simple as writing a test to mak

[perl #55372] [BUG] Segfault/double free when manually running "perl6"

On Sun Sep 07 15:19:22 2008, cotto wrote: > On Thu Jun 12 10:23:06 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > On Thursday 12 June 2008 10:01:21 NotFound wrote: > > > > > Some more details: adding: > > > > > > Parrot_set_flag(interp, PARROT_DESTROY_FLAG); > > > > > > in src/main.c it segfaults also when ex

[perl #41825] [BUG] morph vtable override not working in PIR

On Tue Nov 20 20:58:35 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Wed Mar 14 07:49:33 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Given the following: > > > > .namespace ['A'] > > > > .sub 'morph' :method :vtable > > say 'morphing!' > > .end > > > > .sub main :main > > $P0 = newclass 'A' >

[perl #41892] [BUG] t/stm/llqueue segment violation on test #2

On Mon Mar 19 10:22:42 2007, coke wrote: > test TODOd for next release, thanks for the report. > > (Hopefully it'll get fixed shortly after the release.) > > On Sun Mar 18 08:07:05 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I get SIGSEGV in t/stm/llqueue, test #2 > > > > openSuSe 10.2 linux 2.6.18.8-0.

[perl #46651] [TODO] [C] Make a better interface for hash creation

On Mon Oct 22 07:01:59 2007, pcoch wrote: > In src/pmc/hash.pmc:thaw() there is the todo item: > > /* TODO make a better interface for hash creation > > ... do this. Where do we want to go with this?

[perl #46635] [TODO] [C] Check overflow for -maxint in absolute()

On Thu Feb 21 12:15:06 2008, Whiteknight wrote: > What would be the best way to handle this? We certainly don't need to do > anything on systems where INT_MAX == -INT_MIN, but a simple compiler > directive should help to detect that case. > > In the event that abs(INT_MIN) > abs(INT_MAX), should

[perl #45357] [TODO] Which exception should be thrown with register overflow?

On Tue Sep 11 03:32:51 2007, pcoch wrote: > Having a look through PDD03 I noticed the TODO item left by Chip: > > =head3 Overflow > > If too many values are provided to fit into the given target > registers, Parrot > will throw an exception. Note that if the final target is a P > register

[perl #42378] [TODO] explicit exit from debug_break() op is not ok

On Mon Apr 09 01:29:52 2007, pcoch wrote: > In the file src/ops/debug.ops in the debug_break() op, there is an > explicit exit(0), which is marked as being not an ok thing to do. > This issue needs to be investigated and fixed. It looks like the explicit exit in debug_break() is gone, so I'm marki

[perl #54938] [BUG] Double free

On Fri Sep 05 12:16:25 2008, cotto wrote: > On Tue May 27 13:33:11 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Running this program: > > > > sub foo($a) {say $a} ; my $x = ; > > > > on Ubuntu 8.04 with latest Parrot from svn gives this: > > > > $ ./perl6 test.p6 > > Statement not terminated properly

[perl #58484] [PATCH] Use of uninitialized value in scalar assignment at lib/Parrot/Revision.pm line 95.

On Mon Sep 08 04:23:37 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Applied in r30888. cotto is going to check its functioning on Cygwin, > but it did no harm on Darwin and Linux, so I'm committing it now. > > Thank you very much. > kid51 It looks good on Cygwin too, so I'm marking this resolved.

[perl #56636] [BUG] segfault from sort if comparison is always 1

On Mon Jul 07 00:13:20 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Sunday 06 July 2008 22:17:12 Andrew Johnson via RT wrote: > > > On Sun Jul 06 11:03:37 2008, japhb wrote: > > > > Better yet, we should replace the inherently insecure quicksort > > > algorithm (insecure in the "vulnerable to algorithmic

[perl #52054] [CAGE]: Make all PDDs conform to coding standards

On Mon Sep 08 00:12:44 2008, cotto wrote: > On Mon Sep 08 00:01:08 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Christoph Otto wrote: > > > > > > If those are your thoughts on the subject, then it seems to make sense > > > to add the pdd format test to make test. The attached patch does this. > > > I'll a

[perl #51464] [TODO] [PDD] add date stamps to PDD's

On Mon Sep 08 01:18:37 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Christoph Otto via RT wrote: > > > > Is this something we want to go ahead with or should this ticket be > > rejected? > > I've had it on my hiveminder todo list for over a month now. The problem > is,

[perl #52054] [CAGE]: Make all PDDs conform to coding standards

On Mon Sep 08 00:01:08 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Christoph Otto wrote: > > > > If those are your thoughts on the subject, then it seems to make sense > > to add the pdd format test to make test. The attached patch does this. > > I'll apply it and mark this ticket as resolved before the ne

[perl #57668] [BUG][PATCH] Iterate through the current namespace causes a segfault

On Fri Sep 05 00:18:19 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Bob Rogers wrote: > >From: chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >Fixed in r30286. > > > >-- c > > > > Terrific; thanks. (Especially since it looks like something I may > have > > seen in other circumstances, but could not reproduce

[perl #55372] [BUG] Segfault/double free when manually running "perl6"

On Thu Jun 12 10:23:06 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Thursday 12 June 2008 10:01:21 NotFound wrote: > > > Some more details: adding: > > > > Parrot_set_flag(interp, PARROT_DESTROY_FLAG); > > > > in src/main.c it segfaults also when executing with perl6.pbc, and > > also a lot of parrot test

[perl #39117] [TODO] Using v?snprintf/strlcpy/strlcat when useful

On Wed May 10 11:01:34 2006, stmpeters wrote: > > I'm taking a look at it. I should have something working this evening > for the configs. Adding the HAS_BLAH's will take some additional time. > > Steve Peters > [EMAIL PROTECTED] "when useful" is vague does not indicate why the extra configu

[perl #57610] [PATCH] Resumable exceptions

On Tue Aug 05 04:09:14 2008, tene wrote: > pdd23: > > Exception handlers can resume execution immediately after the > "throw" opcode by invoking the resume continuation which is stored > in the exception object. That continuation must be invoked with no > parameters; in other words, "throw" never

[perl #58374] [TODO][PDD19] Decide on maximum identifier length and implement this.

On Tue Aug 26 18:39:55 2008, rgrjr wrote: >From: Klaas-Jan Stol (via RT) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 04:46:56 -0700 > >From PDD19: > >Identifiers don't have any limit on length at the moment, but some >sane-but-generous length limit may be imposed in the future

[perl #56614] [TODO] Config hash should be marked read-only

On Sat Jul 05 02:53:11 2008, bernhard wrote: > In runtime/parrot/library/config.pir I encountered the comment. > >XXX hash should probably be marked read-only.. > > This should be investigated. > > Regards, > Bernhard This seems to be a very sane suggestion. It's implemented and has a t

[perl #39430] [TODO] Method cache not always invalidated

On Sat May 17 14:55:53 2008, pmichaud wrote: > On Mon Jun 12 16:30:13 2006, jonathan wrote: > > Both Parrot_store_global and store_sub call > Parrot_invalidate_method_cache, > > however the versions of these that take keys (Parrot_store_global_p and > > store_sub_p) fail to do so. > > Is this t

[perl #40156] [TODO] - Can't use an Iterator with a DynLexPad PMC

On Tue Feb 05 06:50:24 2008, coke wrote: > On Wed Aug 16 23:09:16 2006, mdiep wrote: > > I don't know how to write a test for this off the top of my head, but > > Iterator and DynLexPad don't play well together atm. When I tried, I > > got this error: > > > > elements() not implemented in

[perl #48320] [BUG] Example in pdd23 doesn't work

On Sat Sep 06 15:51:16 2008, julianalbo wrote: > Sorry, the code I poste was bad. The valid form is: > > $P1 = new ['Exception'], $P0 # create new exception object > I've changed the example code to use the more common syntax without brackets: $P1 = new 'Exception', $P0 . The code works now, s

[perl #51464] [TODO] [PDD] add date stamps to PDD's

On Fri Apr 04 16:52:39 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Fri Apr 04 04:30:17 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > One (possibly solvable) problem is that subversion tags don't > > substitute properly in the HTML generated versions on the website > >

[perl #48320] [BUG] Example in pdd23 doesn't work

On Sat Feb 16 17:23:47 2008, coke wrote: > The example in the PDD now reads: > > $P0 = new 'String' > $P0 = "something bad happened" > $P1 = new ['parrot';'exception'], $P0 # create new exception object > throw $P1 # throw it > This code continues to not wo

[perl #48971] [BUG] Parrot build failure "no such instruction: `trap'"

On Sun May 04 03:11:12 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Excellent, the patch from ticket 52214 works. > > Walter > resolved

[perl #54110] [BUG] segfault in infix/n_infix with string arguments

On Tue May 13 08:05:08 2008, coke wrote: > On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 9:48 AM, via RT Patrick R. Michaud > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > # New Ticket Created by Patrick R. Michaud > > # Please include the string: [perl #54110] > > # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this > is

[perl #54414] [BUG] t\benchmark\benchmarks.t failure (r27624)

On Mon May 19 03:55:46 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Sun May 18 17:02:30 2008, ajr wrote: > > t\benchmark\benchmarks..28/37 > > # Failed test 'examples/benchmarks/primes2.pasm' > > # at t\benchmark\benchmarks.t line 219. > > # Exited with error code: 1 > > I think this problem is not

[perl #48172] [TODO] [pugs] Getting nonexistent value, exception or undef?

On Wed Dec 05 04:49:22 2007, pcoch wrote: > In languages/pugs/pmc/pugscapture.pmc:retval() there is the todo item: > > /* XXX getting non existent value, exception or undef? > > It looks like we need to determine at this point whether or not the value > we are getting doesn't exist, is an except

[perl #52854] [bug] Build failure with G++

On Mon Apr 14 08:07:32 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 11:40:01AM +0530, Senaka Fernando wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 6:33 AM, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > Thanks, applied as r26965, except for the patch to > > > compilers/imcc/imclexer.c, which

[perl #55196] [BUG] print/say opcodes have different float precision

On Mon Jun 02 13:08:27 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Monday 02 June 2008 12:27:17 Bernhard Schmalhofer wrote: > > > The behavior of > > > > .sub main > > > > $N0 = 3.14159 > > say $N0 > > print $N0 > > print "\n" > > .end > > > > surprised me, as I got: > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

[perl #54938] [BUG] Double free

On Tue May 27 13:33:11 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Running this program: > > sub foo($a) {say $a} ; my $x = ; > > on Ubuntu 8.04 with latest Parrot from svn gives this: > > $ ./perl6 test.p6 > Statement not terminated properly at line 1, near "= ;\n" > current instr.: 'parrot;PGE::Util

[perl #50878] [BUG] is_equal vtable function not callable in C

On Fri Feb 15 02:43:05 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > They're marked as MMD in vtable.tbl, so my guess is that they're not > directly > callable by vtable pointer from C. F (though admittedly > out of > date) suggests that mmd_dispatch_* is the right approach. > > -- c > Sounds good enough

[perl #32087] [PATCH] .include with an absolute path

On Fri Sep 05 00:58:51 2008, cotto wrote: > On Fri Aug 01 06:44:05 2008, coke wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 7:35 PM, James Keenan via RT > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Coke: Given the points Leo made and the fact that there has been > > > nothing from the OP in 4 years, can we close thi

[perl #48176] [TODO] [pugs] Warning: use of uninitialized value

On Wed Dec 05 04:53:15 2007, pcoch wrote: > In languages/pugs/pmc/pugscapture.pmc there are todo items of the form: > > /* XXX Warning: use of uninitialized value */ > > This looks very similar to RT#48170 which was in the regex language. Does > this todo item mean that we should be *warning* ab

[perl #48439] [TODO] [configure] compiling Parrot with LLVM

On Mon Dec 10 08:52:27 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Marton Papp has successfully compiled Parrot with LLVM on Windows with > mingw-make (it's failing 18 tests, which is impressively low for a first > run on a new compiler). Below is his summary of the steps he followed. > I'd like to extract

[perl #51838] [BUG] cygwin build fails

On Tue Mar 18 14:05:34 2008, rurban wrote: > > It's time to use Configure.pl with the option --without-crypto > > Or to add -lcrypto to the cmdline. > Configure.pl fails to pick it up apparently. > > my %Parrot::Config::Generated::PConfig contains -lcrypto in libs > 'libs' => '-ldl -lcrypt -lgm

[perl #52976] [BUG] perl6 stand-alone binary broken

On Wed Apr 16 14:24:28 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Wednesday 16 April 2008 10:49:15 Christoph Otto (Volt) wrote: > > > The perl6 stand-alone binary chokes on chromatic's mmd example > > > (http://www.oreillynet.com/onlamp/blog/2008/04/multiple_dispatch_now_please > >.html) under linux/x86.

[perl #57116] [BUG] make: *** [perl6] Segmentation fault

On Tue Jul 29 00:38:29 2008, tuxdna wrote: > I found that it is now working correctly in the latest revision 29838. resolved

[perl #39313] [TODO] or [BUG] improve PMC compiler

On Fri Jun 27 13:14:53 2008, coke wrote: > > While I think this particular example is now valid with the new calling > conventions, you can get a similar effect with: > > METHOD BORK BORK parent() { > /* nothing to see here*/ > } This ticket doesn't seem to be closeable as is. Would it be goo

[perl #56304] smokej consumes all memory Revision: 28672 on linux

On Mon Jul 14 13:47:29 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Seems to be fixed as of 29440: Sounds like a happy ending. resolved

[perl #32087] [PATCH] .include with an absolute path

On Fri Aug 01 06:44:05 2008, coke wrote: > On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 7:35 PM, James Keenan via RT > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Coke: Given the points Leo made and the fact that there has been > > nothing from the OP in 4 years, can we close this ticket? > > > > Thanks. > > > > kid51 > > > > Jus

[perl #46823] [TODO] [Pir] Rewrite Resizeable*Array tests properly when exceptions are implemented

On Wed Aug 27 22:49:37 2008, cotto wrote: > > Most of these test wouldn't throw an exception anyway, since assigning > to a positive out-of-bounds element simply resizes the array. (This > excludes nonsensically large positive indicies, which should probably > tested for.) I added exception hand

[perl #46823] [TODO] [Pir] Rewrite Resizeable*Array tests properly when exceptions are implemented

On Thu Oct 25 00:49:38 2007, pcoch wrote: > > To be totally honest I wish I knew. I'm just going through converting > the todo items in code into RT tickets and sometimes the todo comments > aren't necessarily all that clear as to what needs to be done. I'm > also (unfortunately) not familiar en

[perl #57814] Bug Report: Error running make on Red Hat Enterprise v 3.6.9

On Mon Aug 11 16:21:07 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > src/main.o(.text+0x5c): In function `main': > src/main.c:52: undefined reference to `Parrot_new' > src/main.o(.text+0x6a):src/main.c:53: undefined reference to > `imcc_initialize' > src/main.o(.text+0x86):src/main.c:58: undefined reference to

[perl #57468] unused VNSNPRINTF check?

On Mon Aug 04 16:29:03 2008, coke wrote: > As I mentioned on IRC, I'd recommend just removing it instead of > adding another probe we're not sure we need. We can always come back > to this ticket and grab your patch for later application if it we need > to. > Good enough. Andy (who originally wr

[perl #46691] [TODO] [C] Should the shift_pmc() method be silently ignored?

On Tue Jul 29 07:46:08 2008, coke wrote: > > Make this ticket one of the children ticket of the META pdd25cx merge > ticket, we can close it out after the merge removes it. > Allison++'s merge removed shift_pmc from src/pmc/exception.pmc, so this ticket is now rejected.

[perl #46691] [TODO] [C] Should the shift_pmc() method be silently ignored?

On Mon Oct 22 10:02:53 2007, pcoch wrote: > In src/pmc/exception.pmc:shift_pmc() there is the todo item: > > PMC *shift_pmc() { > /* fprintf(stderr, "don't do that then\n"); XXX */ > return PMCNULL; > } > > Since the error is commented out, do we need this code (and its as

[perl #48367] [BUG] intlist_get could be dereferencing NULL

On Sat Jul 26 14:34:26 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I'd write that as: > > if (ret) > return *(INTVAL *)ret; > > return (INTVAL)0; > > The pointer casting dereferencing bothers me a little, but if > compilers don't > warn about it > > -- c > That looks cle

[perl #46895] [TODO] [Pir] [C] Investigate and correct incorrect recursion depth counting in debug backtrace

On Thu Jul 24 23:21:19 2008, cotto wrote: > > I agreee. I ran with a few different runcores and always got 1000 as > the number (when Parrot ran and I was patient enough to wait for the > output). It was the same for cgoto, cgp, fast, slow and switch. > I ran the following with a normal build of

[perl #48264] [TODO] [C] Write file-level documentation

On Thu Dec 06 08:54:35 2007, pcoch wrote: > Many files in the Parrot repository are lacking descriptions within the > pod DESCRIPTION section. This needs to be done. An appropriate description > of what the given file does is all that is necessary. r29788 adds a test for this. Unless the test

[perl #57260] [BUG] Segfaults in sprintf opcode

On Fri Jul 25 14:13:59 2008, japhb wrote: > On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 22:18 +0200, Peter Gibbs wrote: > > typedef HUGEINTVAL(*sprintf_getint_t) (PARROT_INTERP,INTVAL, > > SPRINTF_OBJ *); > > > > So, since obj->getint returns a HUGEINTVAL, I gave it one to store the > > result in. > > Fair enoug

[perl #56548] PATCH] for file "01-literals.t"

On Thu Jul 03 14:15:22 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > (sorry if this arrives multiple times, br0ken ISP and all..) > > Hi, > > Although there are some similar tests in t/00-parrot/ I wouldn't start > adding more in this file, because the official test suite lives in the > pugs repository under

[perl #46805] [TODO] [Perl] Add more list_* tests

On Fri Jul 25 11:06:01 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 11:05:28PM -0700, Christoph Otto via RT wrote: > > > From what I can tell, t/src/list.t was deleted or moved sometime > after > > r22464. Searching for some of the more unique-looking strings i

[perl #46895] [TODO] [Pir] [C] Investigate and correct incorrect recursion depth counting in debug backtrace

On Thu May 15 10:24:00 2008, julianalbo wrote: > On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 5:28 PM, via RT Paul Cochrane > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > # XXX > > # in plain functional run-loop result is 999 > > # other run-loops report 998 > > # TODO investigate this after interpreter strtup is done > > # see a

[perl #48367] [BUG] intlist_get could be dereferencing NULL

On Sat Dec 08 18:24:17 2007, petdance wrote: > > In intlist_get(), we call list_get() which can return a NULL. > > Then, the result is checked against -1, and then > dereferenced. > > I suspect that check against -1 should actually be a > check against NULL, but don't know enough to prove it

[perl #46909] [TODO] [Perl] Cope with escaped quotes in tools/build/c2str.pl

On Thu Jun 05 19:07:49 2008, coke wrote: > We can always improve the diagnostic emitted by the PMC compiler. > Mismatched strings are going to be an issue whether they're in a > CONST_STRING declaration or just an assignment to char *. > > So, no, it's not worth fixing up c2str.pl, IMO. So if it

[perl #46805] [TODO] [Perl] Add more list_* tests

On Wed Oct 24 12:53:42 2007, pcoch wrote: > In t/src/list.t there is the todo item: > > # TODO > > which says much in little i.e.: improve the test coverage of the list_* > functionality. >From what I can tell, t/src/list.t was deleted or moved sometime after r22464. Searching for some of the m

[perl #46681] [TODO] [C] Use strerror_r instead of strerror

On Tue Jul 22 23:34:13 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > This patch contains a fix and a simplification. It should now be > cross-platform and thread-safe. I'll test on some other *nixes and go > on from > there. If nothing else it works fine on Ubuntu/x86. It also works in FreeBSD 7.0 and Op

[perl #39738] [BUG] bind fails with errno EADDRNOTAVAIL on darwin and FreeBSD

On Tue Jul 22 23:24:10 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > It works for me too on Mac OSX 10.4 and parrot rev 29370. > Thanks for following up! > Chris > It just goes to show that all problems (even interpersonal ones) go away if you ignore them for long enough. I'm marking this one as resolved.

[perl #39738] [BUG] bind fails with errno EADDRNOTAVAIL on darwin and FreeBSD

On Thu Jul 06 09:21:34 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > With parrot r13181, binding to a non-privileged port on localhost > consistently fails with EADDRNOTAVAIL on Mac OS X and FreeBSD boxes > for Intel and PPC platforms. The same command succeeds on Linux. > > Steps to reproduce: > 1) ./parr

[perl #44967] Using a freed variable (Coverity CID 98)

On Tue Sep 04 11:40:30 2007, rblasch wrote: > > The key here is the "model." While Coverity's model captures the > C quite correctly, I don't think it recognizes the pointer update > in the double linked list, which is done in C, as important. > > Coverity probably sees something like the follow

[perl #43218] Memory leaks (compreg, invokecc)

On Thu Jun 14 16:25:24 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Thursday 14 June 2007 14:42:31 Jurosz Michal wrote: > > > Attached test use compreg P1, "PASM" and invokecc it 100,000 times. > > On win32 (mingw32) it consumes 70MB of RAM with r18834 (107 MB of > RAM > > with r11704). > > With Linux at

[perl #46681] [TODO] [C] Use strerror_r instead of strerror

On Thu Jul 17 15:53:12 2008, julianalbo wrote: > On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 9:59 PM, Christoph Otto via RT > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > With this patch, the new tests still pass on Linux/x86. The patch uses > > STRING->strstart to avoid leaking a malloc'd bu

[perl #46681] [TODO] [C] Use strerror_r instead of strerror

On Thu Jul 17 01:17:51 2008, cotto wrote: > On Wed Apr 23 18:18:00 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > This thread trailed off about 4 months ago. Could we get an update on > > its status, i.e., whether it should be applied, what OSes it's passing > > on, etc. > > > > Thank you very much. > > kid5

[perl #46681] [TODO] [C] Use strerror_r instead of strerror

On Wed Apr 23 18:18:00 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > This thread trailed off about 4 months ago. Could we get an update on > its status, i.e., whether it should be applied, what OSes it's passing > on, etc. > > Thank you very much. > kid51 The tests passed because the strerror/strerror_r code

[perl #46679] [TODO] [C] Check if we need to deallocate strerror strings

On Tue Feb 19 16:19:14 2008, Whiteknight wrote: > On Mon Oct 22 09:49:02 2007, ptc wrote: > > In src/pmc/file.pmc there is the todo item: > > > > /* XXX Check if we need to deallocate strerror strings */ > > > > Do this. > > According to: > > http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/clibrary/cstring/

[perl #40631] [TODO] add tests for native PMC types

On Mon Feb 13 13:05:01 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > all PMCs (src/pmc/*.pmc) should be tested. the basic types, as defined > in PDD17 (docs/pdds/clip/pdd17_basic_types.pod) should be given higher > priority, so tests should be developed first to cover these. > > not surprisingly, basic types h

[perl #56718] [BUG] Array PMC freeze/thaw/visit broken

On Wed Jul 09 00:04:45 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > r29183 adds a test to t/pmc/array.t that exposes some brokenness in > the Array > PMC's freeze/thaw code path. I added the test because it looked like > Array's > freeze/thaw/visit code had no test coverage. It turns out that > list_visit >

[perl #46825] [TODO] [Pir] Fix ResizableBooleanArray C test

On Wed Oct 24 14:23:23 2007, pcoch wrote: > In t/pmc/resizeablebooleanarray.t there is the todo item: > > TODO: { > local $TODO = "this is broken"; > > pasm_output_is( <<'CODE', <<'OUTPUT', "clone" ); > > Which is to say, fix cloning in ResizableBooleanArrays or fix the test (or > both?) It

[perl #56832] Fwd: src/jit/i386/core.jit:1031: error: ?DO? undeclared

On Fri Jul 11 14:00:12 2008, cotto wrote: > On Fri Jul 11 05:29:20 2008, coke wrote: > > Belatedly add Moritz's response to the ticket. > > A fix for this bug was committed in r29289 which looks like it will > resolve this issue. If that's the case, this ticket can be closed. Since there haven

[perl #47109] [CAGE] wrap macro args in parens inside macro bodies

On Sun Jul 13 23:26:51 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > +1 for modifying the test, not the macros. > > -- c > Resloved.

[perl #47109] [CAGE] wrap macro args in parens inside macro bodies

On Thu Feb 21 13:52:31 2008, coke wrote: > On Fri Nov 02 07:56:44 2007, particle wrote: > > as per PDD07 (r22655,) c macro args *must* be wrapped in parens inside > > macro bodies, to allow expressions passed as macro parameters. > > > > for example, i expect: > > #define CLASS_has_alien_parents_

[perl #56832] Fwd: src/jit/i386/core.jit:1031: error: ?DO? undeclared

On Fri Jul 11 05:29:20 2008, coke wrote: > Belatedly add Moritz's response to the ticket. A fix for this bug was committed in r29289 which looks like it will resolve this issue. If that's the case, this ticket can be closed.

[perl #44393] [PATCH] something funny in dod/gc blocking macros

On Tue May 06 17:41:43 2008, coke wrote: > On Fri Aug 03 13:43:42 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > On Friday 03 August 2007 13:29:53 Jerry Gay wrote: > > > > > i'm having trouble on x86_64. when running a 32bit parrot, i get > > > occasional deadlock at the OS level, after Parrot_exit. when runn

  1   2   >