On Fri, 2002-01-25 at 09:07, Melvin Smith wrote:
>
> >1.> There is no link to the FAQ on the Perl6 page (that I could find
> anyway).
> > (http://www.panix.com/~ziggy/parrot.html - I think this it)
>
> This really should be stored or linked in the Perl6 Parrot area.
>
The new location is h
On Sat, 2 Feb 2002, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> On Saturday 02 February 2002 08:53, Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote:
> > I have added Adam's Parrot FAQ to www.parrotcode.org.
> >
> > It's being loaded from cvs.perl.org every hour, so just checkin
> > updates to cvs there.
> >
> > I do,
> >
> > $Faq =~ s!.
On Saturday 02 February 2002 09:37, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
Disregard previous. I forgot to turn off word wrap.
Index: ParrotFAQ.htm
===
RCS file: /home/perlcvs/parrot/docs/ParrotFAQ.htm,v
retrieving revision 1.1
diff -u -r1.1 Parr
On Saturday 02 February 2002 08:53, Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote:
> I have added Adam's Parrot FAQ to www.parrotcode.org.
>
> It's being loaded from cvs.perl.org every hour, so just checkin
> updates to cvs there.
>
> I do,
>
> $Faq =~ s!.*(.*).*!$1!s;
> $Faq =~ s!href="http://www.panix.com/~ziggy/pa
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Steve Fink) writes:
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 11:02:34AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > >Q: Who has commit privileges? Who's responsible for what?
> >
> > A: Good question. Simon and Dan, and a handful of others.
>
> Can anyone fill in the handful? Ask, maybe? I'm hoping for
Nathan Torkington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley writes:
>> I got some mail from a publisher off the back of my 'Not Just for
>> Damians' article asking if I'd like to write a perl 6 book for them.
>> Must reply really.
>
> "Sure, I'd be glad to write about perl 6. Do you also want t
Piers Cawley writes:
> I got some mail from a publisher off the back of my 'Not Just for
> Damians' article asking if I'd like to write a perl 6 book for them.
> Must reply really.
"Sure, I'd be glad to write about perl 6. Do you also want to know
the next Lotto numbers, who'll win the Grand Nat
Nathan Torkington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Simon Cozens writes:
>> As mentioned in my other mail, I also edit perl.com for O'Reilly and
>> Associates, who probably do have commercial interest in the development
>> of Perl.
>
> The other ORA editors keep asking me "should we sign more Perl 5
Simon Cozens writes:
> As mentioned in my other mail, I also edit perl.com for O'Reilly and
> Associates, who probably do have commercial interest in the development
> of Perl.
The other ORA editors keep asking me "should we sign more Perl 5
books? Is Perl 6 going to kill our sales?" and I keep
On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 01:49:06PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> >day jobs. (This would be the first question people would go to when
> >they wanted to confirm that you really are agents of evil corporations
> >intent on destroying our life, liberty, and pursuit of lower perl golf
> >scores.)
>
>
At 11:40 AM 12/5/2001 -0800, Steve Fink wrote:
>On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 11:02:34AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > At 06:29 PM 12/4/2001 -0800, Steve Fink wrote:
> > >Q: What about incremental matching?
> >
> > A: What about it?
>
>Is there any plan to support nonbuffered matching, as in, I have a
On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 12:54:54PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> Not that I'm contemplating actually having parrot run z-code natively,
> but... is there anything in the Z machine that we might want to
> steal^Wreproduce?
I for one would like a PCKUP_FONEBOOTH_N_DIE op.
--
Michael G. Schwern
At 10:15 AM 12/6/2001 +, Leon Brocard wrote:
>Dan Sugalski sent the following bits through the ether:
>
> > The Zork interpreter might be stack based, thinking about it, but it was
> > hardly geared for speed, so I don't know that it'd count if it was.
>
>For what it is worth, in my quest for
Dan Sugalski sent the following bits through the ether:
> The Zork interpreter might be stack based, thinking about it, but it was
> hardly geared for speed, so I don't know that it'd count if it was.
For what it is worth, in my quest for learning more about VMs I've
taken a detailed look at th
G'day all.
On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 01:23:34PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> Besides, the only p-code machine I could think of was UCSD Pascal running
> on the Apple IIs, and that seemed a bit old to reference.
FWIW, in the last days of Microsoft's 16-bit C compiler (at least V7
and V8), it used
On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 02:57:04PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> Seriously, I can't speak for Simon, but I expect Things Can Be Worked Out
> given sufficient stuff. (I am, while easy, not cheap, alas. That whole
> spouse/kids/rent/insurance/unpaid time off day job thing)
I am not sufficiently ar
> > >Q: What about all the others?
> > >A: *What* others? That's it, unless you count perl, python, or ruby.
> >
> >I thought Pascal's (ancient) p-code was a stack VM... Yup, some web
> >pages that I can find in a hurry, confirm that.
>
> Right, but back then they called 'em "p-code interpreter"
> >And for my own personal edification, has anyone tried to work a deal
> >(through YAS perhaps) for Parrot like Damian Conway has for Perl?
>
> That's a good question. I'll punt it off to someone else. Nat? Damian?
YAS is on the very brink of announcing its 2002 funding drive.
See:
At 01:46 PM 12/5/2001 -0600, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
>On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 11:02:34AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > >Q: How do Dan and Simon have enough time to work on this?
> >
> > A: We don't--why do you think this is taking so long?
>
>A related FAQable question ...
>
>Q: Is it possible
On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 11:02:34AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> >Q: How do Dan and Simon have enough time to work on this?
>
> A: We don't--why do you think this is taking so long?
A related FAQable question ...
Q: Is it possible to "buy" Dan's and Simon's time to work on nothing
but Parrot? I
On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 11:02:34AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 06:29 PM 12/4/2001 -0800, Steve Fink wrote:
> >Q: What about incremental matching?
>
> A: What about it?
Is there any plan to support nonbuffered matching, as in, I have a
socket connection open that I want to scan for some patte
On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 01:32:32PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> Right, but FORTH's not an interpreted language, generally speaking.
No, but PostScript is. :-)
(...as if that wasn't completely obvious...)
Z.
On Wed, 05 Dec 2001 13:32:32 -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>Right, but FORTH's not an interpreted language, generally speaking.
The old FORTH's in the 80's worked pretty much like the p-copde
interpreter.
Nowadays, FORTH compilers are really optimizing compilers. There are
excellent commercial off
From: Dan Sugalski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> At 12:29 PM 12/5/2001 -0500, Melvin Smith wrote:
>
> > >>A: VMS' QIO system. Sorta.
> >
> >Its been years since I worked on VMS. QIO is sorta
> >"async-IO", no?
>
> Completely async, yep, as are many of VMS' system calls.
>
> >Can someone point me
At 12:36 PM 12/5/2001 -0600, David M. Lloyd wrote:
>On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>
> > The Zork interpreter might be stack based, thinking about it, but it was
> > hardly geared for speed, so I don't know that it'd count if it was.
>
>FWIW, there are many MUDs and MUCKs out there (multi
On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> The Zork interpreter might be stack based, thinking about it, but it was
> hardly geared for speed, so I don't know that it'd count if it was.
FWIW, there are many MUDs and MUCKs out there (multiplayer text-based
role-playing gmaes for those not in the k
At 03:38 AM 12/5/2001 +0100, Bart Lateur wrote:
>On Tue, 04 Dec 2001 15:57:56 -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>
> >Q: Don't you know that stack machines are the way to go in software?
> >A: No, in fact, I don't.
> >
> >Q: But look at all the successful stack-based VMs!
> >A: Like what? There's just the
At 12:29 PM 12/5/2001 -0500, Melvin Smith wrote:
> >>A: VMS' QIO system. Sorta.
>
>Its been years since I worked on VMS. QIO is sorta "async-IO", no?
Completely async, yep, as are many of VMS' system calls.
>Can someone point me to some starting material for QIO and/or unimplemented
>wants/wish
>>A: VMS' QIO system. Sorta.
Its been years since I worked on VMS. QIO is sorta "async-IO", no?
Can someone point me to some starting material for QIO and/or unimplemented
wants/wishes for Parrot's IO sybsys? I might like to wade in in this area.
I'll also start looking thru the archive.
Mel
At 06:29 PM 12/4/2001 -0800, Steve Fink wrote:
>On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 04:11:58PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > Seriously, there are real answers to a whole lot of design questions. Ask
> > 'em and I'll get FAQable answers to 'em once and for all.
>
>Whee! Ok. Some of these are probably duplicat
On Tue, 04 Dec 2001 15:57:56 -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>Q: Don't you know that stack machines are the way to go in software?
>A: No, in fact, I don't.
>
>Q: But look at all the successful stack-based VMs!
>A: Like what? There's just the JVM.
>
>Q: What about all the others?
>A: *What* others? Th
On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 10:45:53PM -0500, Adam Turoff wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 06:29:34PM -0800, Steve Fink wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 04:11:58PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > > Seriously, there are real answers to a whole lot of design questions. Ask
> > > 'em and I'll get FAQab
On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 06:29:34PM -0800, Steve Fink wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 04:11:58PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > Seriously, there are real answers to a whole lot of design questions. Ask
> > 'em and I'll get FAQable answers to 'em once and for all.
>
> Whee! Ok. Some of these are
On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 04:11:58PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> Seriously, there are real answers to a whole lot of design questions. Ask
> 'em and I'll get FAQable answers to 'em once and for all.
Whee! Ok. Some of these are probably duplicates, and some
inappropriate for a Parrot FAQ, but:
Q:
On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 04:27:22PM -0500, Adam Turoff wrote:
> Besides, Schwern is having no end of problems with the Perl QA
> wiki. I'd much rather put the docs in CVS later this week.
Actually, I make a lot more noise than I'm actually having trouble.
With the exception of that one big glitch
On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 03:26:25PM -0500, Adam Turoff wrote:
> Expect another update tonight or tomorrow.
Here ya go. Same place as last time.
1 General Questions
1. What is Parrot?
2. Why "Parrot"?
3. Is Parrot the same thing as Perl6?
4
On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 03:20:46PM -0600, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 04:11:58PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > Seriously, there are real answers to a whole lot of design questions. Ask
> > 'em and I'll get FAQable answers to 'em once and for all.
>
> Could the FAQ be ma
On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 04:11:58PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> Seriously, there are real answers to a whole lot of design questions. Ask
> 'em and I'll get FAQable answers to 'em once and for all.
Could the FAQ be made a wiki so that others can play too?
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL P
At 04:07 PM 12/4/2001 -0500, Nguon Hao Ching wrote:
>Here's one more:
>
>Q: How does Dan know so much?
>A: Quiet, You.
Now, now, that's not nice. :) Besides, it's:
Q: How come you know all these answers?
A: I wrote the questions. It's easy that way.
Seriously, there are real answers to a
Here's one more:
Q: How does Dan know so much?
A: Quiet, You.
-Hao
At 03:26 PM 12/4/2001 -0500, Adam Turoff wrote:
>The beginnings of a Parrot FAQ can be found here:
Here's some more:
Q: What language is Parrot written in?
A: C
Q: For the love of god, man, why?!?!?!?
A: Because it's the best we've got.
Q: That's sad
A: So true. Regardless, C's available prett
41 matches
Mail list logo
