Piers~
On 11/30/05, The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> So, I hopped into a taxi (and I use the word hopped advisedly) and
> repaired straightway to King's Cross and thence home to Gateshead, where
> my discomfort was somewhat ameliorated by the distraction of preparin
On Tue, 15 Nov 2005, The Perl 6 Summarizer wrote:
Perl 6 perlplexities
Michele Dondi worries that the increase in complexity of some aspects of
Perl 6 is much bigger than the increase in functionality that the
complexity buys us. In particular Michele is concerned that the Perl 6
pa
On Nov 15, 2005, at 17:24, The Perl 6 Summarizer wrote:
The Perl 6 Summary for the fortnight ending 2005-11-13
"string_bitwise_*"
Leo, it seems to boil down to a choice between throwing an
exception or
simply mashing everything together and marking the 'resulting bit
mess'
On Tue, 2005-11-15 at 16:24 +, The Perl 6 Summarizer wrote:
> ...Roger Browne (whose name I keep wanting to use as a Clerihew)...
Thanks for the summaries, Piers! Here's a Clerihew for you:
Roger Browne
took his Parrot to town
Wearing an upside-down
Amber crown >:)
How to w
On Fri, 4 Nov 2005, The Perl 6 Summarizer wrote:
Slightly tangentially to this, Dan Sugalski blogged a couple of weeks
ago about his successes and failures with Parrot. The comments are worth
reading -- there's a fair few more or less well founded complaints about
the way the Perl 6
> Rejigging NCI to use the ffcall library
> Nick Glencross wondered about rejigging NCI, the parrot Native Call
> Interface to use the ffcall library. In fact he went so far as to offer
> up a proof of concept implementation. Apparently the ffcall approach
> makes it much easier to write callba
On Mon, Sep 26, 2005 at 18:12:23 +0100, The Perl 6 Summarizer wrote:
> Allomopherencing
> Not satisfied with inventing Exceptuations, Yuval invented
> Allomopherencing as well. Just don't ask me what it means because I
> don't know.
It was just a bad joke on Exceptuation's expense ;-
On Thu, Sep 23, 2004 at 09:12:32AM -0400, Buddha Buck wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 21:11:02 +0100, The Perl 6 Summarizer
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 2004-09-17
> >Another week, another summary, and I'm running late. So:
> >
> > This week in perl6-com
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 21:11:02 +0100, The Perl 6 Summarizer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 2004-09-17
>Another week, another summary, and I'm running late. So:
>
> This week in perl6-compiler
>
> Bootstrapping the grammar
>Uri Guttman had some thoughts
The Perl 6 Summarizer wrote:
Namespaces
(Am I the only person who wants to repeat Namespaces! with the same
intonation used for 'Monorail!' in the Simpsons?)
Not any more...
On Thu, 29 Jul 2004, Butler, Gerald wrote:
>
> Of course American and Right are synonymous! Just ask OUR WONDERFUL GOD (I
> mean President) GEORGE W. BUSH. He'll tell ya'
>
OK, gentlemen, this is both way off topic and starting to head into flame
war territory, so I suggest that we either qu
L PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: This week's summary
Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley wrote:
>> Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>Care to explain what those are, O great math tea
Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley wrote:
>> Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>Care to explain what those are, O great math teacher?
>> What's a math teacher?
>
> It's the right^H^H^H^H^HAmerican way to say "maths teacher".
You mean American
On 2004-07-28 at 20:55:28, Piers Cawley wrote:
> What's a math teacher?
Oh, come now. You may refuse to *use* the Leftpondian short form, but
pretending not to *recognize* it is a bit much. :)
--
Mark REED| CNN Internet Technology
1 CNN Center Rm SW0831G | [EMAIL PROTEC
Piers Cawley wrote:
Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Care to explain what those are, O great math teacher?
What's a math teacher?
It's the right^H^H^H^H^HAmerican way to say "maths teacher".
--
Brent "Dax" Royal-Gordon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Perl and Parrot hacker
Oceania has alway
Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The Perl 6 Summarizer wrote:
>> The infinite thread
>> Pushing onto lazy lists continued to exercise the p6l crowd (or at
>> least, a subset of it). Larry said that if someone wanted to hack
>> surreal numbers into Perl 6.1 then
On Mon, 26 Jul 2004, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
> The Perl 6 Summarizer wrote:
> > The infinite thread
> > Pushing onto lazy lists continued to exercise the p6l crowd (or at
> > least, a subset of it). Larry said that if someone wanted to hack
> > surreal numbers into Perl 6.1 t
On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 10:29:15 -0700, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The Perl 6 Summarizer wrote:
> > The infinite thread
> > Pushing onto lazy lists continued to exercise the p6l crowd (or at
> > least, a subset of it). Larry said that if someone wanted to hack
> >
On Mon, Jul 26, 2004 at 10:29:15AM -0700, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
> The Perl 6 Summarizer wrote:
> > The infinite thread
> >Pushing onto lazy lists continued to exercise the p6l crowd (or at
> >least, a subset of it). Larry said that if someone wanted to hack
> >surreal numbers
The Perl 6 Summarizer wrote:
The infinite thread
Pushing onto lazy lists continued to exercise the p6l crowd (or at
least, a subset of it). Larry said that if someone wanted to hack
surreal numbers into Perl 6.1 then that would be cool.
Care to explain what those are, O great math tea
--- The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Okay, so the interview was on Tuesday 13th of July.
> It went well; I'm going to be a maths teacher.
"As usual, we begin with maths-geometry:
In Mathematics last week, one Pythagoras suggested there might be a
relationship between the sides
Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> --- The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Okay, so the interview was on Tuesday 13th of July.
>> It went well; I'm going to be a maths teacher.
[...]
> As we all know, time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a
> banana. If you
The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Congratulations Ion, don't forget to send in a patch to the CREDITS
> file.
$ grep -1 Ion CREDITS
N: Ion Alexandru Morega
D: string.pmc
Thanks again for your summary,
leo
Please take me off your mailing list. I don't know how you got my address,
but I have no idea what you are talking about. Mrs. Yardley address:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: "The Perl 6 Summarizer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL
The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Passing arrays of structs to NCI subs
Is working in the meantime.
> Separating allocation and initialization of objects
> Last week, Leo posted the latest object benchmarks, and things were
> fast. But there was one test where Python
Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Subroutine calls
>> Leo announced that he's added a "pmc_const" opcode to parrot. The idea
>> being that, [ ... ]
>> you would instead fetch a preexisting Subroutine PMC
>> from the
The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Subroutine calls
> Leo announced that he's added a "pmc_const" opcode to parrot. The idea
> being that, [ ... ]
> you would instead fetch a preexisting Subroutine PMC
> from the PMC constant pool.
Not quite. I've implemented it
The Perl 6 Summarizer wrote:
> Parrotbug reaches 0.0.1
> Jerome Quelin responded to Dan's otherwise ignored request for a
> parrot equivalent of perlbug when he offered an implementation of
> parrotbug for everyone's perusal, but didn't go so far to add it to
> the distribution. I don't think i
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It turned out to be a simple matter of unimplemented functions,
which he and Leo rapidly implemented.
s/he and Leo/he/
I was just the one hitting Ctrl-C Ctrl-V. (Actually, I was using the
mouse, since I was working
The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Good news! Bad news!
> Good news! Dan says the infrastructure is in place to do delegated
> method calls for vtable functions with objects. Bad news! It doesn't
> actually work
That's solved already. You can override e.g. "inc Px" w
The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 20040229
> Native PBC issues
> It turns out that, just at the moment, Parrot bytecode isn't actually
> platform independent. This will, of course, get fixed, but it's not
> Leo's top priority at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Scott) writes:
> On 10 Feb 2004, at 14:09, The Perl 6 Summarizer wrote:
> > I wonder how long it'll be before someone reimplements
> > them in in PIR...
>
> or Perl6 perchance.
Well, Perl6::Rules should be coming out soon, so that should help.
--
The problem with
On 10 Feb 2004, at 14:09, The Perl 6 Summarizer wrote:
I wonder how long it'll be before someone reimplements
them in in PIR...
or Perl6 perchance.
The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Backward branch, Warnocked
> Sadly the answer was "We're not sure when it'll be fixed, it's really
> hard to fix
Its already fixed.
Thanks for your summary,
leo
At 12:03 AM +0100 1/29/04, Elizabeth Mattijsen wrote:
At 10:40 +0100 1/28/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
The Perl 6 Summarizer wrote:
The costs of sharing
Leo Töposted a test program and some results for timing the difference
between using shared and unshared PMCs. ... Hopefully the benchmar
Elizabeth Mattijsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 10:40 +0100 1/28/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>>$ time parrot shared_ref.pasm
>>
>>real0m0.375s
> Ah.. I want a Ponie! ;-)
Actually some bits are still missing:
- The SharedRef construction code has to ensure that the refered PMC is
share
At 10:40 +0100 1/28/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
The Perl 6 Summarizer wrote:
The costs of sharing
Leo Töposted a test program and some results for timing the difference
between using shared and unshared PMCs. ... Hopefully the benchmark will
get checked into examples/benchmarks as sug
The Perl 6 Summarizer wrote:
The costs of sharing
Leo Töposted a test program and some results for timing the difference
between using shared and unshared PMCs. ... Hopefully the benchmark will
get checked into examples/benchmarks as suggested by Luke earlier.
Done now.
$ time perl58
At 12:36 PM -0500 1/13/04, Uri Guttman wrote:
> "TP6S" == The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
TP6S> Congratulations Dan
TP6S> Melvin Smith offered his congratulations to Dan for the
TP6S> first commercial use of Parrot. I think I can safely say we
TP6S> al
> "TP6S" == The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
TP6S> Congratulations Dan
TP6S> Melvin Smith offered his congratulations to Dan for the
TP6S> first commercial use of Parrot. I think I can safely say we
TP6S> all echo those congratulations.
shouldn't that
The Perl 6 Summarizer wrote:
Problems with "make test"
Harry Jackson couldn't get his build of parrot to finish running "make
test". After a certain amount of thrashing about by the team, Dan
narrowed it down to issues with the mutant '2.96' version of GCC that
some versions of Re
Melvin Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 09:30 PM 1/5/2004 +, Piers Cawley wrote:
>>Melvin Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > At 07:55 PM 1/5/2004 +0100, Lars Balker Rasmussen wrote:
>> >>The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >> > people's salaries will depend on
At 09:30 PM 1/5/2004 +, Piers Cawley wrote:
Melvin Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 07:55 PM 1/5/2004 +0100, Lars Balker Rasmussen wrote:
>>The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > people's salaries will depend on Parrot. I confess I wouldn't be
>> > surprised if, b
Melvin Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 07:55 PM 1/5/2004 +0100, Lars Balker Rasmussen wrote:
>>The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > people's salaries will depend on Parrot. I confess I wouldn't be
>> > surprised if, by the end of the year, we haven't seen the full
Lars Balker Rasmussen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Me? I think Perl 6's design 'in the large' will be pretty much
>> done once Apocalypse 12 and its corresponding Exegesis are
>> finished. Of course, the devil is in the details, but
At 07:55 PM 1/5/2004 +0100, Lars Balker Rasmussen wrote:
The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> people's salaries will depend on Parrot. I confess I wouldn't be
> surprised if, by the end of the year, we haven't seen the full
> implementation of at least one of the big non-
The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Me? I think Perl 6's design 'in the large' will be pretty much done once
> Apocalypse 12 and its corresponding Exegesis are finished. Of course,
> the devil is in the details, but I don't doubt that the hoped for
> existence of a w
Thank you for a lovely Christmas Present.
Michael
On Dec 24, 2003, at 2:37 AM, The Perl 6 Summarizer wrote:
The Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 20031221
Welcome one and all to the penultimate Perl 6 Summary for 2003. The
nights are long, the air is cold, freezing fog made the journey
Michael Joyce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thank you for a lovely Christmas Present.
Any time.
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley writes:
>> The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >
>> > http://groups.google.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> This should, of course, read:
>>
>> http://groups.google.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Or even:
>
> http://groups.google.c
Piers Cawley writes:
> The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Vocabulary
> > If you're even vaguely interested in the workings of Perl 6's object
> > system, you need to read the referenced post.
> >
> > Luke Palmer, worrying about people using Object related vocabulary
The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Vocabulary
> If you're even vaguely interested in the workings of Perl 6's object
> system, you need to read the referenced post.
>
> Luke Palmer, worrying about people using Object related vocabulary in
> subtly inconsistent way
On 2003-12-10 at 15:05:09, The Perl 6 Summarizer wrote:
> Oh yes, if you've not been following, "^op" (ie, the vector operators)
> has become " >>op<< " which is, if nothing else, a right swine to write
> in a POD C<> escape.
Eh, >>op<< is just a hack for people who can't type C<»op«>
The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> PMC Compiler 2nd edition
> ... Melvin wondered if the time had come to replace the
> existing ops2c and pmc2c with the newer versions. Leo thought that
> pmc2c2 was definitely stable enough, but wasn't too sure about ops2
The Perl 6 Summarizer wrote:
Do Steve Fink's debugging for him
Steve Fink had a problem with some generated code throwing a segfault
when it was run and, having hit the debugging wall himself, posted the
code to the list and asked help. Leo tracked down the bug in Parrot and
fixed it.
Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley wrote:
>
>> "newsub" and implicit registers
>> [...] ops [...] that IMCC needed to
>> track. Leo has a patch in his tree that deals with the issue.
>
> Sorry, my posting seems to have been misleading. The register tracking
> code
Sam Vilain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 12:21, Piers Cawley wrote;
> > Freeze/thaw data format and PBC
> > Leo Tötsch is working on the data serialization/deserialization
> Cool. How are hooks in place for tools like Pixie and Tangram when
> these objects are being stored
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 12:21, Piers Cawley wrote;
> Freeze/thaw data format and PBC
> Leo Tötsch is working on the data serialization/deserialization
> (aka Freeze/Thaw) system discussed over the last few weeks. He
> wondered if there were any plans for the frozen image data
> format. Leo
Piers Cawley wrote:
"newsub" and implicit registers
[...] ops [...] that IMCC needed to
track. Leo has a patch in his tree that deals with the issue.
Sorry, my posting seems to have been misleading. The register tracking
code is in the CVS tree.
Thanks again for your summaries,
leo
Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Parrot Calling Convention Confusion
>> ... -- I thought they were exactly the same as an unprototyped call,
>> but you invoke the return continuation (P1) instead of P0, the other
>> registers
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Parrot Calling Convention Confusion
> ... -- I thought they were exactly the same as an unprototyped call,
> but you invoke the return continuation (P1) instead of P0, the other
> registers are set up exactly as if you were making an unprotot
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Object Freezing
[ ... ]
> ... The upshot is that we're doing it Dan's way; Glorious Leader
> continues to trump Pumpking Patchmonster.
As this is a summary, abbove sentence is a summary as well. The reality
is more complex. The final implementa
Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> ... spending the morning of your 36th birthday
>
> Happy birthday to you and us.
Thanks.
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ... spending the morning of your 36th birthday
Happy birthday to you and us.
l - "A full year has passed, hasn't it?" - eo
> Dan spoke too soon, we have just confirmed that PIERS_C =
> 2.04739336492890995260663507109 * BRENT_D
Brent isn't adult? Gosh!
BRENT_D = 36/2.04739336492890995260663507109 = appr. 17 ages and 296 days
Simon Glover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 15 Sep 2003, Melvin Smith wrote:
>
>> Dan spoke too soon, we have just confirmed that PIERS_C =
>> 2.04739336492890995260663507109 * BRENT_D
>
> They both know their time of birth to the nearest nanosecond?
> Impressive.
I don't. But I do kno
On Mon, 15 Sep 2003, Melvin Smith wrote:
> Dan spoke too soon, we have just confirmed that PIERS_C =
> 2.04739336492890995260663507109 * BRENT_D
They both know their time of birth to the nearest nanosecond?
Impressive.
Simon
Dan spoke too soon, we have just confirmed that PIERS_C =
2.04739336492890995260663507109 * BRENT_D
-Melvin
"Brent Dax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
09/15/2003 11:43 AM
To: Melvin Smith/ATLANTA/Contr/[EMAIL PROTECTED], <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc:
Su
EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: This week's summary
On Mon, 15 Sep 2003, Brent Dax wrote:
> Piers Cawley:
> # Welcome to this week's Perl 6 Summary. And what better way could
> there
> # be of spending the morning of your 36th bi
Dan Sugalski:
# On Mon, 15 Sep 2003, Brent Dax wrote:
# > Piers Cawley:
# > # Welcome to this week's Perl 6 Summary. And what better way
could
# > there
# > # be of spending the morning of your 36th birthday than by
reading
# > # through a bunch of old messages in a couple of mailing li
On Mon, 15 Sep 2003, Brent Dax wrote:
> Piers Cawley:
> # Welcome to this week's Perl 6 Summary. And what better way could
> there
> # be of spending the morning of your 36th birthday than by reading
> # through a bunch of old messages in a couple of mailing lists and
> # boiling t
Piers Cawley:
# Welcome to this week's Perl 6 Summary. And what better way could
there
# be of spending the morning of your 36th birthday than by reading
# through a bunch of old messages in a couple of mailing lists and
# boiling them down into a summary?
Happy birthday, Piers. E
Matt Fowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley wrote:
>> I want a Ponie!
>> I promise that, as development of Ponie (the port of Perl 5 to Parrot)
>> accelerates you'll see a summary of Ponie activity in this summary as
>> well. However, almost all the traffic on the [EMAIL PRO
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Why "new_pad *INT*"?
> Michal Wallace asked for some clarification about "new_pad", the opcode
> that creates a new lexical scratchpad. He thought that, 9 times out of
> 10 you would want to create a new pad at the next lower depth from the
Simon Glover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 11 Aug 2003, Piers Cawley wrote:
>
>> Matt Fowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > Piers Cawley wrote:
>> >> I want a Ponie!
>> >> I promise that, as development of Ponie (the port of Perl 5 to Parrot)
>> >> accelerates you'll see a summ
On Mon, 11 Aug 2003, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Matt Fowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Piers Cawley wrote:
> >> I want a Ponie!
> >> I promise that, as development of Ponie (the port of Perl 5 to Parrot)
> >> accelerates you'll see a summary of Ponie activity in this summary as
> >>
Dave Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 07:32:00PM -, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
>> Will I really be forced to reimplement the whole subrecursive frobnizer
>> for tied magic ?"
>
> Almost certainly, I expect.
There's nothing to stop us *both* summarizing the parro
Piers Cawley wrote in perl.perl6.internals :
> I want a Ponie!
> I promise that, as development of Ponie (the port of Perl 5 to Parrot)
> accelerates you'll see a summary of Ponie activity in this summary as
> well.
In fact I imagined I was more or less going to do this, based on
imagi
On Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 07:32:00PM -, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
> Will I really be forced to reimplement the whole subrecursive frobnizer
> for tied magic ?"
Almost certainly, I expect.
--
"There's something wrong with our bloody ships today, Chatfield."
Admiral Beatty at the Battle of Jut
- Original Message -
From: "Piers Cawley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 5:42 AM
Subject: This Week's Summary
Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 20030810
Another week, another summary. How predict
Piers Cawley wrote:
I want a Ponie!
I promise that, as development of Ponie (the port of Perl 5 to Parrot)
accelerates you'll see a summary of Ponie activity in this summary as
well. However, almost all the traffic on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing
list has been about fighting Subver
> >> list has been about fighting Subversion. However, Arthur did post a mini
> >> status update at the end of July
> >> http://xrl.us/o2s -- Status report
> >
> > I am having trouble following this url. Is there another?
>
> Ah... bugger. I thought ponie-dev got gatewayed through to
At 9:14 AM -0700 7/16/03, Tupshin Harper wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
Traditional processors aren't stack-oriented, not even ones that
are more register-starved than the x86 family. (I'm thinking of the
6502 with it's 1.75 registers here)
Yes, I know. The issue is that GCC is practically hard-wired
If memory serves me right, Paolo Molaro wrote:
> > You're insane. :)
Why does this sentence keep popping up whenever anyone discusses modding
gcc :)
> > registers, and register starvation's one of the more annoying things
> > a compiler has to deal with.
imcc !
But this is what Dan had to say
Paolo Molaro wrote:
Traditional processors aren't stack-oriented, not even ones that are
more register-starved than the x86 family. (I'm thinking of the 6502
with it's 1.75 registers here)
The wording "stack-oriented processor" is a little misleading, since it
usually means the processor has
Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 4:23 PM -0700 7/15/03, Tupshin Harper wrote:
Piers Cawley wrote:
Targeting Parrot from GCC
Discussion in the thread entitled 'WxWindows Support / Interfacing
Libraries' centred on writing a Parrot backend to GCC. (No, I
have no
idea what that has to do with the
On 07/16/03 Dan Sugalski wrote:
> >> pit/pratfalls. At one point, Tupshin suggested emulating a 'more
> >> traditional stack-oriented processor' and I don't think he was
> >> joking...
> >>
> >Indeed, I wasn't, but I wish somebody would at least have the
> >decency to tell me how insane this
At 4:23 PM -0700 7/15/03, Tupshin Harper wrote:
Piers Cawley wrote:
Targeting Parrot from GCC
Discussion in the thread entitled 'WxWindows Support / Interfacing
Libraries' centred on writing a Parrot backend to GCC. (No, I have no
idea what that has to do with the thread subject.) Tupshi
Rhys Weatherley wrote:
Have a look at the Portable.NET FAQ, which describes some of the
difficulties
in targetting stack machines with gcc.
http://www.southern-storm.com.au/pnet_faq.html#q4_7
Cheers,
Rhys.
Yeah...I've read that before. But it doesn't mention the possibility of
emulating
On Wednesday 16 July 2003 09:23 am, Tupshin Harper wrote:
> At one point, Tupshin suggested emulating a 'more
> >traditional stack-oriented processor' and I don't think he was
> > joking...
>
> Indeed, I wasn't, but I wish somebody would at least have the decency to
> tell me how insane this is
Piers Cawley wrote:
Targeting Parrot from GCC
Discussion in the thread entitled 'WxWindows Support / Interfacing
Libraries' centred on writing a Parrot backend to GCC. (No, I have no
idea what that has to do with the thread subject.) Tupshin Harper, Leo
Tötsch and Benjamin Goldberg di
At 11:02 PM +0100 7/3/03, Tim Bunce wrote:
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 05:10:23PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
> "AB" == Alan Burlison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
AB> Dan Sugalski wrote:
>> The more I think about this the more I want to punt on the whole
>> idea. Cross-platform async IO is
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 8:11 AM +0100 7/3/03, Alan Burlison wrote:
> >Dan Sugalski wrote:
> >
> >>I'm pretty sure the POSIX docs say that you can't call mutex
> >>routines from within interrupt code, which makes sense--the last
> >>thin
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 05:10:23PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
> > "AB" == Alan Burlison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> AB> Dan Sugalski wrote:
> >> The more I think about this the more I want to punt on the whole
> >> idea. Cross-platform async IO is just one big swamp.
>
> AB> Agreed
Uri Guttman wrote:
who here will be at oscon (or yapc::eu)? i would like to get a small BOF
going on this subject. i agree it is a morass but i have some ideas and
i know dan has plenty. but we had better learn to swim these swamps and
not get eaten by the gators. we can drain them, convert them t
> "AB" == Alan Burlison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
AB> Dan Sugalski wrote:
>> The more I think about this the more I want to punt on the whole
>> idea. Cross-platform async IO is just one big swamp.
AB> Agreed. Glug, glug, glug ;-)
who here will be at oscon (or yapc::eu)? i wou
Dan Sugalski wrote:
The more I think about this the more I want to punt on the whole idea.
Cross-platform async IO is just one big swamp.
Agreed. Glug, glug, glug ;-)
--
Alan Burlison
--
At 8:11 AM +0100 7/3/03, Alan Burlison wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
I'm pretty sure the POSIX docs say that you can't call mutex
routines from within interrupt code, which makes sense--the last
thing you want is for an interrupt handler to block on a mutex
aquisition.
I haven't got a copy, but I'
Dan Sugalski wrote:
I'm pretty sure the POSIX docs say that you can't call mutex routines
from within interrupt code, which makes sense--the last thing you want
is for an interrupt handler to block on a mutex aquisition.
I haven't got a copy, but I'd be surprised if they explicitly forbade it -
At 4:01 PM +0100 7/2/03, Alan Burlison wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
Unfortunately given what the code does we can't use mutexes, since
they're not interrupt-safe, which I'm not particularly happy about.
The queues in question are thread-specific, though, which takes
some of the danger out of thin
1 - 100 of 113 matches
Mail list logo
