Re: Does parrot_assembly.pod need an update?

Bernhard Schmalhofer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Looking more closely at 'parrot_assembly.pod' I started to find more > discrepancies between the documentation in 'ops/*.pod' and > 'parrot_assembly.pod'. This document and docs/pdds/pdd06_pasm.

Does parrot_assembly.pod need an update?

Hi, I was trying to track down a core dump in 'examples/assembly/pcre.imc'. Looking at the code in 'library/pcre.imc' and the documentation in 'parrot_assembly.pod' I found that 'store_globals' was misdocumented. The two parameters were interchanged. Look

parrot_assembly.pod

docs/parrot_assembly.pod is just an earlier version of PDD 6. An empowered person should remove it. Mike

Re: [perl #17907] [PATCH docs/parrot_assembly.pod] Minor typos and consistencies

On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 02:31:53AM +, chromatic wrote: > I've been browsing the docs, and took the time to do a bit of copyediting. > There's room for more consistency -- sometimes the registers are called 'X' > and 'Y' and other times 'x' and 'y'. Yes, I did notice this. Is there any sor

[perl #17907] [PATCH docs/parrot_assembly.pod] Minor typos and consistencies

- url: http://rt.perl.org/rt2/attach/39768/32196/db6a98/assembly.patch --- parrot_assembly.pod~ Sun Oct 13 19:04:11 2002 +++ parrot_assembly.pod Sun Oct 13 19:18:05 2002 @@ -251,7 +251,7 @@ =head2 Data manipulation -These ops handle manipulating the data in registers

Re: parrot_assembly.pod

On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, Alex Gough wrote: > Much of parrot_assembly.pod seems out of date, or raises interesting > questions: > > Are we going to bother with NAMESPACEs and SUBs in assembler? Yup. We just haven't gotten there yet. > Is it worth keeping documentation for (imp

parrot_assembly.pod

Much of parrot_assembly.pod seems out of date, or raises interesting questions: Are we going to bother with NAMESPACEs and SUBs in assembler? (from parrot_assembly.pod: Namespaces are noted with the NAMESPACE directive. It takes a single parameter, the name of the namespace. Multilevel

Re: [PROPOSED] Moving op docs from docs/parrot_assembly.pod tocore.ops

stract machine that the code in the source implements. > I want them separate on purpose. If, at some point, someone comes along and > decides that we're a bunch of clueless fsckwits and they can do a better > job implementing Parrot, they work from parrot_assembly.pod. Understood. OK. I&#

Re: [PROPOSED] Moving op docs from docs/parrot_assembly.pod to core.ops

that describes the abstract machine that the code in the source implements. I want them separate on purpose. If, at some point, someone comes along and decides that we're a bunch of clueless fsckwits and they can do a better job implementing Parrot, they work from parrot_assembly.pod. If you w

[PROPOSED] Moving op docs from docs/parrot_assembly.pod to core.ops

Dan -- I've made core.ops contain op documentation, and I'd like to make it the official place where ops are documented. That means I'd like to make sure there is nothin documented in docs/parrot_assembly.pod that isn't equivalently or superiorly documented in core.ops