Re: My Parrot 0.7.0 patches (cygwin)

2008-08-26 Thread jerry gay
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 11:00 AM, Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > jerry gay wrote: >>> >>> #+ and #- is lisp so I don't want to destroy #+ the syntax rules. >>> #IF(): is quite short and easy to read. >>> >> i know it was all caps before, but do we need to continue that trend? >> i find

Re: My Parrot 0.7.0 patches (cygwin)

2008-08-26 Thread Allison Randal
jerry gay wrote: #+ and #- is lisp so I don't want to destroy #+ the syntax rules. #IF(): is quite short and easy to read. i know it was all caps before, but do we need to continue that trend? i find it ugly. All-caps is the Parrot coding standard for macros and #defines, and these fall in

Re: My Parrot 0.7.0 patches (cygwin)

2008-08-26 Thread jerry gay
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 2:34 AM, Reini Urban <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'll go now for something like > > #IF(key1|key2&(key3&!key4)) > #IFNOT(key1|key2&(key3&!key4)) > > And probably a shortcut for the negative else clause, like > #IF(cygwin): > #ELSE: > > #+ and #- is lisp so I don't want to d

Re: My Parrot 0.7.0 patches (cygwin)

2008-08-26 Thread Reini Urban
2008/8/26 Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> On Mon, 25 Aug 2008, Reini Urban wrote: >>> >>> To clarify my bold statement: >>> The ALGOL-like syntax is not "sane" because, >>> * it is hard to parse, > > Not actually true. It's just different to parse. And, in general Parrot > optimizes for maki

Re: My Parrot 0.7.0 patches (cygwin)

2008-08-26 Thread Allison Randal
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008, Reini Urban wrote: To clarify my bold statement: The ALGOL-like syntax is not "sane" because, * it is hard to parse, Not actually true. It's just different to parse. And, in general Parrot optimizes for making code easy to *read* even if it is slightly harder to parse. We

Re: My Parrot 0.7.0 patches (cygwin)

2008-08-25 Thread Andy Dougherty
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008, Reini Urban wrote: > Reini Urban schrieb: > > 2008/8/24 Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Reini Urban wrote: > To clarify my bold statement: > The ALGOL-like syntax is not "sane" because, > * it is hard to parse, > * it forbids our keywords AND, NOT and OR as config_h

Re: My Parrot 0.7.0 patches (cygwin)

2008-08-25 Thread Moritz Lenz
Reini Urban wrote: > Moritz Lenz schrieb: >> Reini Urban wrote: >>> Moritz Lenz schrieb: >>>> Reini Urban wrote: >>>>> Attached are updates to the cygwin070patches branch. >>>>> Thanks for applying the patches! >>>> applied as

Re: My Parrot 0.7.0 patches (cygwin)

2008-08-25 Thread Reini Urban
Moritz Lenz schrieb: Reini Urban wrote: Moritz Lenz schrieb: Reini Urban wrote: Attached are updates to the cygwin070patches branch. Thanks for applying the patches! applied as r30543. And this one also please. fix cuddled else and some beautification. Also applied (r30547). And one

Re: My Parrot 0.7.0 patches (cygwin)

2008-08-25 Thread Allison Randal
Reini Urban wrote: In lib/Parrot/Configure/Compiler.pm, I agree that 'CONDITIONED_LINE' and 'INVERSE_CONDITIONED_LINE' aren't the clearest names, but '+' and '-' are far less clear. Change them to something meaningful like 'SHOW_LINE_IF' and 'HIDE_LINE_IF'. We can note the change in DEPRECATED.

Re: My Parrot 0.7.0 patches (cygwin)

2008-08-25 Thread Moritz Lenz
Reini Urban wrote: > Moritz Lenz schrieb: >> Reini Urban wrote: >>> Attached are updates to the cygwin070patches branch. >>> Thanks for applying the patches! >> >> applied as r30543. > > And this one also please. > > fix cuddled else and some beautification. Also applied (r30547).

Re: My Parrot 0.7.0 patches (cygwin)

2008-08-25 Thread Reini Urban
Moritz Lenz schrieb: Reini Urban wrote: Attached are updates to the cygwin070patches branch. Thanks for applying the patches! applied as r30543. And this one also please. fix cuddled else and some beautification. -- Reini Urban http://phpwiki.org/ http://murbreak.at/ Index: src/library.c

Re: My Parrot 0.7.0 patches (cygwin)

2008-08-25 Thread Moritz Lenz
Reini Urban wrote: > Attached are updates to the cygwin070patches branch. > Thanks for applying the patches! applied as r30543. Moritz -- Moritz Lenz http://moritz.faui2k3.org/ | http://perl-6.de/

Re: My Parrot 0.7.0 patches (cygwin)

2008-08-25 Thread Reini Urban
Attached are updates to the cygwin070patches branch. Forget it. The Data.pm errors were still in. This is better. -- Reini Urban http://phpwiki.org/ http://murbreak.at/ cygwin070patches_3.patch.gz Description: GNU Zip compressed data

Re: My Parrot 0.7.0 patches (cygwin)

2008-08-25 Thread Reini Urban
Reini Urban schrieb: 2008/8/24 Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Reini Urban wrote: You want one patch only against HEAD? That's easy. But I dislike the idea, as it violates the usage of single tickets. This is different than the usual case as it's a collection of depend

Re: My Parrot 0.7.0 patches (cygwin)

2008-08-24 Thread Reini Urban
2008/8/24 Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Reini Urban wrote: >> >> You want one patch only against HEAD? That's easy. >> But I dislike the idea, as it violates the usage of single tickets. > > This is different than the usual case as it's a coll

Re: My Parrot 0.7.0 patches (cygwin)

2008-08-24 Thread Allison Randal
Reini Urban wrote: You want one patch only against HEAD? That's easy. But I dislike the idea, as it violates the usage of single tickets. This is different than the usual case as it's a collection of dependent patches that can't be evaluated independently. Splitting them o

Re: My Parrot 0.7.0 patches (cygwin)

2008-08-23 Thread Reini Urban
Allison Randal schrieb: Reini Urban wrote: Moritz Lenz schrieb: Against which svn revision should I apply those patches for testing? I'll try to be uptodate against HEAD with the patches in my SVN repo. But things are changing fast over there. config/gen/makefiles/root.in was chang

Re: My Parrot 0.7.0 patches (cygwin)

2008-08-23 Thread Allison Randal
Reini Urban wrote: Moritz Lenz schrieb: Against which svn revision should I apply those patches for testing? I'll try to be uptodate against HEAD with the patches in my SVN repo. But things are changing fast over there. config/gen/makefiles/root.in was changed by the ncigen merge yest

Re: My Parrot 0.7.0 patches (cygwin)

2008-08-23 Thread Reini Urban
Moritz Lenz schrieb: Reini Urban wrote: > See http://code.google.com/p/cygwin-rurban/source/browse/#svn/trunk/release/parrot/patches http://code.google.com/p/cygwin-rurban/source/browse/trunk/release/parrot/patches/series defines the order. I tried to apply those patches stupidly b

Re: My Parrot 0.7.0 patches (cygwin)

2008-08-22 Thread Moritz Lenz
Reini Urban wrote: > See > http://code.google.com/p/cygwin-rurban/source/browse/#svn/trunk/release/parrot/patches > > http://code.google.com/p/cygwin-rurban/source/browse/trunk/release/parrot/patches/series > defines the order. I tried to apply those patches stupidly both a

Re: My Parrot 0.7.0 patches (cygwin)

2008-08-22 Thread Reini Urban
2008/8/22 Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> As my number of patches is too big, and the size is too big, >> I update them only in my public SVN repo, not in the tickets anymore. >> And the order in which they should be applied is important. >> >> See >&

Re: My Parrot 0.7.0 patches (cygwin)

2008-08-22 Thread Allison Randal
Reini Urban wrote: As my number of patches is too big, and the size is too big, I update them only in my public SVN repo, not in the tickets anymore. And the order in which they should be applied is important. See http://code.google.com/p/cygwin-rurban/source/browse/#svn/trunk/release/parrot

My Parrot 0.7.0 patches (cygwin)

2008-08-22 Thread Reini Urban
2008/8/17 Reini Urban <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > FYI: > The cygwin release for parrot-0.7.0-1 will contain the following yet > unapplied patches to make it work: > > (in this order from my quilt series file) > 39742-installed-conflict.patch > 56544-install_files.patch &

[perl #40830] [PATCH] Man-Chicken's awesome hackathon throw-away patches...

2008-04-03 Thread James Keenan via RT
No comments since March 16, so I'm closing the ticket.

[perl #40830] [PATCH] Man-Chicken's awesome hackathon throw-away patches...

2008-03-16 Thread James Keenan via RT
Thanks for the update. I think I'll leave this ticket open for a few more days in the hope that Matt and Steve comment.

Re: [perl #40830] [PATCH] Man-Chicken's awesome hackathon throw-away patches...

2008-03-16 Thread Reini Urban
2008/3/16, James Keenan via RT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > While I think the patches proposed in this ticket are moribund, the fact > is that what little feedback we get on Cygwin indicates that many core > tests are failing during smoke testing. See, e.g., > > http://smoke

[perl #40830] [PATCH] Man-Chicken's awesome hackathon throw-away patches...

2008-03-16 Thread James Keenan via RT
While I think the patches proposed in this ticket are moribund, the fact is that what little feedback we get on Cygwin indicates that many core tests are failing during smoke testing. See, e.g., http://smoke.parrotcode.org/smoke/parrot-smoke-0.5.3-devel-r26408-unknown--i386-cygwin-ccache-default

Re: parrot question and stacked patches

2007-06-30 Thread Bram Geron
pancake wrote: > (...) > Ok, after the presentations.. I have some problems for writing the patches > because more than one bug report matches the same source file, and i have to > wait everytime for commits before doing anything more. I understand that this > is my problem and I sh

parrot question and stacked patches

2007-06-21 Thread pancake
presentations.. I have some problems for writing the patches because more than one bug report matches the same source file, and i have to wait everytime for commits before doing anything more. I understand that this is my problem and I should be pacient, but on pdb there are a lot of broken things that are

Re: Patches for review

2007-03-12 Thread Sam Vilain
Will Coleda wrote: > In *general*, yes, tickets good, so we don't lose any patches, even > the minor ones. > > That said, email a list of subjects and I'll take a look. (most of > what I see from you on the list went to parrotbug and so already has > a ticket.) &g

Re: Patches for review

2007-03-12 Thread Will Coleda
In *general*, yes, tickets good, so we don't lose any patches, even the minor ones. That said, email a list of subjects and I'll take a look. (most of what I see from you on the list went to parrotbug and so already has a ticket.) Regards. On Mar 12, 2007, at 10:30 PM, Sam Vi

Patches for review

2007-03-12 Thread Sam Vilain
I've submitted a set of changes to the ML for review. Do you really want tickets for all of those changes? Some of them are quite minor. Sam.

Re: Parrot-14347 Patches to get Parrot to build on VMS VAX

2006-09-04 Thread Vorländer , Martin
Leo wrote: > I wrote: > > Bear with me on the VMSish filenames; "xxx;1" is the original > > version, "xxx;" is the patched version of the file. > > I wrote a small perl helper, dealing with that. But what > about filenames like: > > +++ lib/parrot.configure/step.pm; > > which actually is:

Re: Parrot-14347 Patches to get Parrot to build on VMS VAX

2006-09-04 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Am Montag, 4. September 2006 13:02 schrieb Vorländer, Martin: > Bear with me on the VMSish filenames; "xxx;1" is the original > version, "xxx;" is the patched version of the file. I wrote a small perl helper, dealing with that. But what about filenames like: +++ lib/parrot.configure/step.pm;

Parrot-14347 Patches to get Parrot to build on VMS VAX

2006-09-04 Thread Vorländer , Martin
Hi, at YAPC::EU vaxman.de bugged me to try and build Parrot on VMS. As all I had with me was an emulated VAX on my WinXP notebook (running VMS 7.3 and DEC C 6.0), I used that. First I needed some time to build/test perl 5.8.8, but I think I have it running now. Then I set out to Configure.pl Parr

patches not making it into RT

2006-01-08 Thread Joshua Hoblitt
Hi Folks, As of late, particularly in the run up to 0.4.1, people seem to be falling out of the habit of submitting patches as a parrotbug. This could cause either real PITAs in the future where someone has to goto a huge effort to track these things down or more likely the patches will just

Re: [perl #37619] [PATCH] punie patches

2005-11-05 Thread Allison Randal
On Nov 5, 2005, at 19:37, Will Coleda (via RT) wrote: Sending as a patch since 1) we're close to a freeze, and 2) this is allison's code. Allison: this patch fixes a dependency issue in the makefile, eliminates some deprecation issues, and corrects a small issue in the grammar that allows punie

[perl #37619] [PATCH] punie patches

2005-11-05 Thread via RT
# New Ticket Created by Will Coleda # Please include the string: [perl #37619] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=37619 > Sending as a patch since 1) we're close to a freeze, and 2) this is allison's code. A

Patches floating and accumulating ...

2005-10-17 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Patches floating and accumulating and I've not much time in the foreseeable future to have a look at all. Fellow committers, please apply locally, test, and possilby checkin patches. Thanks, leo

patches accumulating

2005-07-22 Thread Leopold Toetsch
There is a long list of folks with commit rights for parrot svn. I don't have always the time to ci @all_patches (and will not have the next days to do so), therefore I'd really appreciate, if patches could be reviewed, commented if needed, and *applied* w/o me too, if these patche

Re: various patches

2005-04-14 Thread Ron Blaschke
Leopold Toetsch wrote: > I can't test Win32 patches, so I can apply these only as is. I am trying to cover this base with constant "update, build, post-to-list, patch" cycles. ;-) Ron

Re: various patches

2005-04-14 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 2005-04-14 at 13:54 +0200, Leopold Toetsch wrote: >> I'd appreciate if some folks with commit privs have a look at patches >> accumulating on the list and apply the simple ones. > What qualifies as "simple"?

Re: various patches

2005-04-14 Thread chromatic
On Thu, 2005-04-14 at 13:54 +0200, Leopold Toetsch wrote: > I'd appreciate if some folks with commit privs have a look at patches > accumulating on the list and apply the simple ones. What qualifies as "simple"? I don't mind handling doc patches and the like. -- c

Re: various patches

2005-04-14 Thread Jens Rieks
On Thursday 14 April 2005 13:54, Leopold Toetsch wrote: > I'm currently evolving the infix operations and scalar classes and have > rather big diffs against svn HEAD. > > I'd appreciate if some folks with commit privs have a look at patches > accumulating on the list

various patches

2005-04-14 Thread Leopold Toetsch
I'm currently evolving the infix operations and scalar classes and have rather big diffs against svn HEAD. I'd appreciate if some folks with commit privs have a look at patches accumulating on the list and apply the simple ones. Thanks, leo

Object patches summary

2005-03-11 Thread Leopold Toetsch
The first bunch of patches is in. The visible part is a new opcode: op get_mro(out PMC, in PMC) This returns the array reference of the MRO (Method Resolution Order) Array. This is basically the same as the list of ISA strings, except that the MRO array contains class PMCs and abstract base

Re: NOTICE: New interpreter naming (people with pending patches, read this now)

2004-10-19 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The naming of the interpreter structure has changed. The struct is > now called "parrot_interp_t"; Thanls, leo

NOTICE: New interpreter naming (people with pending patches, read this now)

2004-10-17 Thread Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon
The naming of the interpreter structure has changed. The struct is now called "parrot_interp_t"; use of the typedef "Interp" is now recommended in function declarations and definitions (e.g. C). This will affect many pending patches. If you're working on a patch, ple

Re: RT, closing patches

2004-09-08 Thread William Coleda
Even if there is no special syntax, it'd be helpful if the person applying the patch fired off a "Thanks, Applied" or some such. Saves the bugadmins the trouble of checking the source to see if it's actually been applied or not. Will "slogging through RT" Coleda. William Coleda wrote: http://rt.p

RT, closing patches

2004-09-08 Thread William Coleda
http://rt.perl.org:80/rt3//Ticket/Display.html?id=31229 Dan replied with "Applied, Thanks", but the ticket wasn't marked applied. Is this some magic that could/should happen? Is there another way to invoke it? (By the time you see this, I will have manually marked it applied and resolved.)

Re: [perl #30320] [PATCH] Minor build patches for languages/m4

2004-06-21 Thread Andy Dougherty
On Sat, 19 Jun 2004, Leopold Toetsch wrote: > Ok. #30094 is applied. Could you please rediff #30320, I get rejects. Hmm. It looks like an issue of trailing spaces on some lines. I just tested this one, and it applied cleanly: diff -r -u parrot-current/config/gen/makefiles/m4.in parrot-andy/co

Re: [perl #30320] [PATCH] Minor build patches for languages/m4

2004-06-19 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Andrew Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 17 Jun 2004, Leopold Toetsch via RT wrote: >> Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > This patch assumes my previous Configure.pl patch for c++ detection has >> > been included. >> >> Which ticket number? > Oops. Sorry to be vague -

Re: [perl #30320] [PATCH] Minor build patches for languages/m4

2004-06-17 Thread Andrew Dougherty
[#30094]. Dan had already applied several other little patches of mine, but he skipped this one, either because he's very busy and had many other things to do or because he didn't like it :-). -- Andy Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [perl #30320] [PATCH] Minor build patches for languages/m4

2004-06-17 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This patch assumes my previous Configure.pl patch for c++ detection has > been included. Which ticket number? leo

[perl #30320] [PATCH] Minor build patches for languages/m4

2004-06-17 Thread via RT
# New Ticket Created by Andy Dougherty # Please include the string: [perl #30320] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # http://rt.perl.org:80/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=30320 > This patch allows languages/m4 to build for me. It removes some gcc-specific flags

one more note to vtable/MMD patches

2004-05-10 Thread Leopold Toetsch
All of the current and future changes during shifting vtable functions to MMD and deleting vtable entries may break existing PBCs. Any change in the current classes enums, in MMD_ constants ... basically any change in the generated runtime/parrot/include/*.pasm files. I'll update PBC_COMPAT aft

Re: [PS] open patches

2003-10-31 Thread Robert Spier
> I resolved #24030 and #24038 by changing the Status field and hitting > Save Changes, then I noticed there was a Resolve option on the top > righthand side which asks for details for a notification email. I'm > wondering which is the approved way? Either is fine. By default the "Resolve" pag

Re: [PS] open patches

2003-10-31 Thread Michael Scott
Reeducation succeeded. I resolved #24030 and #24038 by changing the Status field and hitting Save Changes, then I noticed there was a Resolve option on the top righthand side which asks for details for a notification email. I'm wondering which is the approved way? I ask because I'll add a deta

Re: [PS] open patches

2003-10-30 Thread Robert Spier
> (24205) [PATCH] removing -mno-accumulate-outgoing-args for non x86 arch > > the last one was applied by Dan, but the Status wasn't updated on RT. > I can't do it myself (permission denied). I've updated the ticket. RT thinks your email address is @perl.it, but the ticket was created from the @

Re: [PS] open patches

2003-10-30 Thread Robert Spier
> My account (mikescott) at http://auth.perl.org/auth/account shows the > correct email. The RT page assures me that I'm signed in as mikescott. > I go to the Modify ticket #24030 and set Status to resolved, click Save > Changes and get Status: Permission Denied. RT had a different idea of what

Re: [PS] open patches

2003-10-30 Thread Aldo Calpini
these are the patches of mine which still show as Pending: (17405) [PATCH] correct make pdb on Win32 (24149) [PATCH] small Makefile patch (rm *.s in realclean instead of clean) (24205) [PATCH] removing -mno-accumulate-outgoing-args for non x86 arch the last one was applied by Dan, but the

Re: [PS] open patches

2003-10-30 Thread Michael Scott
On 30 Oct 2003, at 07:20, Robert Spier wrote: Some of patches on that list that are mine. #24030 Obsolete #24038 Obsolete #24043 Applied #24063 Applied #24177 Rejected #24188 Applied I tried to update the status of #24177 but got Permission Denied. Any chance of that being changed so I could

Re: [PS] open patches

2003-10-29 Thread Robert Spier
> Some of patches on that list that are mine. > #24030 Obsolete > #24038 Obsolete > #24043 Applied > #24063 Applied > #24177 Rejected > #24188 Applied > I tried to update the status of #24177 but got Permission Denied. > Any chance of that being changed so I could updat

Re: [PS] open patches

2003-10-29 Thread Michael Scott
Some of patches on that list that are mine. #24030 Obsolete #24038 Obsolete #24043 Applied #24063 Applied #24177 Rejected #24188 Applied I tried to update the status of #24177 but got Permission Denied. Any chance of that being changed so I could update them myself? Mike On Wednesday, Oct 22

Re: [PS] open patches

2003-10-22 Thread Robert
If anyone goes through that list and provides me with a list of needed updates (in a standardized format), I can do some bulk updates relatively easily. -R Leopold Toetsch wrote: http://www.parrotcode.org/openpatches/ shows a list of open patches ranging from #801 up to recent ones. Some of

[PS] open patches

2003-10-22 Thread Leopold Toetsch
http://www.parrotcode.org/openpatches/ shows a list of open patches ranging from #801 up to recent ones. Some of them are marked pending or applied but not closed. I'd be glad if someone could go through the list and update it so that the actual state is reflected at that site. I know, so

Re: DOD patches and some remarks

2003-01-11 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Steve Fink wrote: Ah! So all we have to do is use discontiguous PMCs -- the first 32 bytes is at offset 0, the second at byte offset 128 or so. Then we can interleave them, so that everything in offset 0..127 gets loaded into the cache, but 128..255 is left untouched. (Just kidding.) s/32/16/

Re: DOD patches and some remarks

2003-01-10 Thread Steve Fink
On Jan-10, Leopold Toetsch wrote: > > You get double the amount of PMCs into the cache - used during marking > and freeing. It isn't related to alignment, just more throughput. Oh. You're right. I was thinking that the unused portion of the PMC wouldn't need to be loaded into the cache, so that

Re: DOD patches and some remarks

2003-01-10 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Steve Fink wrote: On Jan-09, Leopold Toetsch wrote: So the question is, should I checked it in / partially / forget it. Changes are: - SPMC (small or scalar PMC) with half the size of a PMC, no promotion or whatever to a PMC, disabled with one define in pmc.c - pool flags with aligned pools,

Re: DOD patches and some remarks

2003-01-10 Thread Steve Fink
On Jan-09, Leopold Toetsch wrote: > I have here now ~15 files different to CVS, which I would like to sync > in either direction for easier future changes. > So the question is, should I checked it in / partially / forget it. > > Changes are: > - SPMC (small or scalar PMC) with half the size of a

DOD patches and some remarks

2003-01-09 Thread Leopold Toetsch
I have here now ~15 files different to CVS, which I would like to sync in either direction for easier future changes. So the question is, should I checked it in / partially / forget it. Changes are: - SPMC (small or scalar PMC) with half the size of a PMC, no promotion or whatever to a PMC, disa

Re: Status of my patches ...

2002-09-27 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Steve Fink wrote: > To expand on that: the currently commented-out dependency on > Configure.pl in the makefile is wrong. It says the $(STICKY_FILES) > depend only on the Configure.pl script itself, which is woefully > incomplete: There are a lot more dependencies, that are uncovered: classe

Re: Status of my patches ...

2002-09-26 Thread Steve Fink
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 09:13:07AM -0400, Andy Dougherty wrote: > On 26 Sep 2002, Tom Hughes wrote: > > > Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > The problem here is that the rule in the Makefile that causes it to > > > > rerun Configure.pl if any of the Configure.pl genera

Re: Status of my patches ...

2002-09-26 Thread Tom Hughes
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > No it's not a reset thing. I should have documented it better, though i > thought the wod "initial" would tell it ;-) Well I was thinking of it as initial allocation versus reallocation. > The intlist structur

Re: Status of my patches ...

2002-09-26 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Tom Hughes wrote: > In message [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>#17549, 17569 intlist bugfix, speedup, test > Applied. Thanks again for all the checkins. > One slight query I had was the meaning of the extra parameter added > to intlist_new() by

Re: Status of my patches ...

2002-09-26 Thread Andy Dougherty
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Tanton Gibbs wrote: > What is annoying is that on my cygwin system, everytime I type make it > rebuilds everything starting from Configure. It doesn't matter if I have > touched anything or not. In other words > perl Configure.pl && make > > will run Configure.pl twice. Y

Re: Status of my patches ...

2002-09-26 Thread Tanton Gibbs
ginal Message - From: "Andy Dougherty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Tom Hughes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 9:13 AM Subject: Re: Status of my patches ... > On 26 Sep 2002, Tom Hughes wrote: > > > An

Re: Status of my patches ...

2002-09-26 Thread Andy Dougherty
On 26 Sep 2002, Tom Hughes wrote: > Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > The problem here is that the rule in the Makefile that causes it to > > > rerun Configure.pl if any of the Configure.pl generated files is out > > > of date clashes with the recently introduced edit to

Re: Status of my patches ...

2002-09-26 Thread Tom Hughes
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 26 Sep 2002, Tom Hughes wrote: > > > The problem here is that the rule in the Makefile that causes it to > > rerun Configure.pl if any of the Configure.pl generated files is out > > of date clashes with the rec

Re: Status of my patches ...

2002-09-26 Thread Andy Dougherty
On 26 Sep 2002, Tom Hughes wrote: > > > #17517 build system, permanent Configure runs - annoying at least > The problem here is that the rule in the Makefile that causes it to > rerun Configure.pl if any of the Configure.pl generated files is out > of date clashes with the recently introduced e

Re: Status of my patches ...

2002-09-26 Thread Tom Hughes
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > #17549, 17569 intlist bugfix, speedup, test Applied. One slight query I had was the meaning of the extra parameter added to intlist_new() by this patch. I assume the idea is that you can call it with a value of 0

Re: Status of my patches ...

2002-09-26 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Tom Hughes wrote: > In message [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>#17353/17323 test for Parrot_sprintf > Applied. Thank you. > ... The outstanding question here is anyop.h > and anyop.c in languages/imcc as they are not built, and seem to have > b

Re: Status of my patches ...

2002-09-26 Thread Leopold Toetsch
would >>be fine, if I could checkin at least the imcc changes myself, so that >>not 3 different people send patches WRT missing commas in imcc.y. >> > > I definitely vote for you to be given commit privileges. Not all of > those patches should be applied without

Re: Status of my patches ...

2002-09-26 Thread Tom Hughes
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > #17353/17323 test for Parrot_sprintf Applied. I've also updated MANIFEST and the .cvsignore files to try and match something approaching reality. The outstanding question here is anyop.h and anyop.c in languages/

Re: Status of my patches ...

2002-09-26 Thread Steve Fink
if I could checkin at least the imcc changes myself, so that > not 3 different people send patches WRT missing commas in imcc.y. I definitely vote for you to be given commit privileges. Not all of those patches should be applied without posting them for review, but most could be. I see imcc a

Re: Status of my patches ...

2002-09-26 Thread Tom Hughes
In message <20020925234547$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Tanton Gibbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > #17517 build system, permanent Configure runs - annoying at least > > I wish someone would commit this one as this does fix a very annoying > problem, especially on cygwin. Applied. The problem he

Re: Status of my patches ...

2002-09-25 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Tom Hughes wrote: >>#17578 > Applied. First of all, thank you for comitting these. I hate 3-way rediff's ;-) >>#17193 necessary for imcc to write out PBC > Applied. Like you I don't like it much but there aren't any other > obviously better ways. Yes, seems so. > I missed that when it

Re: Status of my patches ...

2002-09-25 Thread Tanton Gibbs
> #17517 build system, permanent Configure runs - annoying at least I wish someone would commit this one as this does fix a very annoying problem, especially on cygwin. Tanton

Re: Status of my patches ...

2002-09-25 Thread Tom Hughes
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > #17578 imcc including all fixes sent to the list except todays fix >by Andy. > - actually the 3rd fix summary IIRC I sent in (s. there for a list of >patches, which are obsol

Status of my patches ...

2002-09-25 Thread Leopold Toetsch
or who applies what when and why or not? This questions arises sometimes, so I'll ask. Here is a list of current open patches in decreasing priority: #17578 imcc including all fixes sent to the list except todays fix by Andy. - actually the 3rd fix summary IIRC I sent in (s. ther

Re: [COMMIT] A couple of patches from last night...

2002-09-06 Thread Andy Dougherty
On Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Jeff wrote: > Ewps. It was recently pointed out to me that I accidentally reversed > #17000. The problem has been fixed, I believe. Sorry, Andy. That's ok, it's partly my fault too. I had posted the patch hoping for comments, but grew impatient. I knew it was a decent band-

Re: [COMMIT] A couple of patches from last night...

2002-09-05 Thread Jeff
Jeff wrote: > > And some more marked as committed that got missed... > Patch #17000 - Ewps. It was recently pointed out to me that I accidentally reversed #17000. The problem has been fixed, I believe. Sorry, Andy. -- Jeff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: [COMMIT] A couple of patches from last night...

2002-09-05 Thread Jeff
Steve Fink wrote: > > I have applied at least one other not on your list (#17008). Should I > be marking things as applied? I didn't think I had the permissions to > do that, so I've just been trying to make sure I post a "Thanks, > applied" so it gets into RT's reply set. Can I do more than that

Re: [COMMIT] A couple of patches from last night...

2002-09-05 Thread Steve Fink
I have applied at least one other not on your list (#17008). Should I be marking things as applied? I didn't think I had the permissions to do that, so I've just been trying to make sure I post a "Thanks, applied" so it gets into RT's reply set. Can I do more than that?

Re: [COMMIT] A couple of patches from last night...

2002-09-05 Thread Sean O'Rourke
committed. I'm so far just marking > patches as 'Applied', not closing out the RT report. > > (NOte: I'm not claiming that I committed all of these... Most of them > were simply committed but not marked in RT as applied... > > Patch #17007 - This needs to be

[COMMIT] A couple of patches from last night...

2002-09-05 Thread Jeff
And some more marked as committed that got missed... Most of the time I'm looking at http://www.parrotcode.org/openpatches/ in order to find out what needs to be committed. I'm so far just marking patches as 'Applied', not closing out the RT report. (NOte: I'm not clai

Re: problems sending patches

2002-08-03 Thread Robert Spier
>I don't like spam. Thanks for keeping it out. I try. :) >How do you recruit new "someone"s? I head down to the local mall and hold up a big sign. >Are they the same sort of "someone"s who manage perl5 bugs? Yup. (Or just anyone silly enough to volunteer.) >And (IIRC) Spam Assassin is th

Re: problems sending patches

2002-08-01 Thread Nicholas Clark
On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 11:44:00PM -0700, Robert Spier wrote: > >On Wed, Jul 24, 2002 at 08:44:20AM -0700, Stephen Rawls wrote: > >> The last two (well, the only two :) patches I sent > >> were counted as spam. Some of the points were becuase > > Sorry about that!

Re: problems sending patches

2002-07-31 Thread Robert Spier
>On Wed, Jul 24, 2002 at 08:44:20AM -0700, Stephen Rawls wrote: >> The last two (well, the only two :) patches I sent >> were counted as spam. Some of the points were becuase Sorry about that! I'm trying to be better safe than sorry in preventing spam from getting to

Re: tutorial on submitting patches

2002-07-31 Thread Robert Spier
John Porter writes: > >Aldo Calpini wrote: >> this is a little tutorial about submitting patches >> (should be added to a FAQ, or somewhere where it's handy > >I think this deserves its own page somewhere on >dev.perl.org. Seems like a good idea. I've ad

  1   2   >