On Wed, 19 Mar 2003, Matthijs van Duin wrote:
> >(4) (internals) Given that Parrot has so many different control mechanisms
> >(call/ret, exceptions, closures, continuations, ...), how do we maintain
> >consistency? And how much of that is parrot's responsibility (versus the
> >perl6 compiler's)?
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to all of you for working
through these issues. I bent my brain on the Perl 5 regex engine,
and that was just a "simple" recurse-on-success engine--and I'm not
the only person it drove mad. I deeply appreciate that Perl 6's
regex engine may drive you e
On Tue, 18 Mar 2003, Matthijs van Duin wrote:
> and maybe also:
> What is the current plan?
>
> although I got the impression earlier that there isn't any yet for invoking
> subrules :-)
See line 1014, languages/perl6/P6C/rule.pm. The hack I used was to call
rules like ordinary subs, and have th
> My main questions are:
>
> Is there a simpler system I'm overlooking?
> Which of the two systems would you prefer if speed isn't the issue?
Mechanism 1.
> Which system is likely to run faster on parrot?
They're both likely to be very slow.
> and maybe also:
> What is the current plan?
>
