% chromatic has left chromatic!~chromatic@sub17-30.member.dsl-only.net % Ademan has joined #parrot r26562 | chromatic++ | trunk: : [PGE] Reordered generated code to bail out of an obviously-failing match before : creating PMCs to store results for successful results. This is a minor : optimization. diff: http://parrotvm.org/svn/parrot/revision/?rev=26562 % uniejo has joined #parrot % iblechbot has joined #parrot % slightlyoff has joined #parrot % askie has left askie!~askie@81.171.100.208 % slightlyoff has left slightlyoff!~slightlyo@204.14.154.209 % askie has joined #parrot % Dave has left Dave!~dave@pool-141-153-244-48.mad.east.verizon.net % kj has joined #parrot % Dave has joined #parrot % skids has left skids!~bri@c-71-233-204-100.hsd1.ma.comcast.net % iblechbot has left iblechbot!~iblechbot@ppp-62-216-204-60.dynamic.mnet-online.de % ruoso has joined #parrot % cognominal has left cognominal!~cognomina@82.67.232.89 % iblechbot has joined #parrot % silug has left silug!~steve@ppp-70-225-69-79.dsl.covlil.ameritech.net % ask has joined #parrot % IllvilJa has left IllvilJa!~jilves@emea-netcache1.oracle.co.uk % mire has joined #parrot % skids has joined #parrot % skids has left skids!bri@140.232.205.194 % skids has joined #parrot % skids has left skids!bri@140.232.205.194 % particl1 has joined #parrot % jrt4 has left jrt4!~bojangles@c-24-18-106-126.hsd1.mn.comcast.net r26563 | kjs++ | trunk: : [nqp] update bootstrap/actions.pm a bit. diff: http://parrotvm.org/svn/parrot/revision/?rev=26563 % teknomunk has left teknomunk!~teknomunk@ubuntubob.residential.okstate.edu % teknomunk has joined #parrot % kid51 has joined #parrot r26564 | kjs++ | trunk: : [nqp] add compiler driver for bootstrap version of nqp.pir : update manifest, which also includes Whatever class for perl6 which wasn't added apparently. diff: http://parrotvm.org/svn/parrot/revision/?rev=26564 % teknomunk has left teknomunk!~teknomunk@ubuntubob.residential.okstate.edu % mire has left mire!~Frodo@37-174-222-85.adsl.verat.net % IllvilJa has joined #parrot % silug has joined #parrot r26565 | kjs++ | trunk: : [nqp] update makefile with a "boot" target, which builds the bootstrap version of nqp. diff: http://parrotvm.org/svn/parrot/revision/?rev=26565 r26566 | kjs++ | trunk: : [nqp] fix paths for .includes in bootstrap compiler driver. diff: http://parrotvm.org/svn/parrot/revision/?rev=26566 % teknomunk has joined #parrot r26567 | kjs++ | trunk: : [nqp][bootstrap] various updates : add an .include for the builtins. : update the TODO: 1 thing has been done. : fix a thing in actions.pm diff: http://parrotvm.org/svn/parrot/revision/?rev=26567 % slightlyoff has joined #parrot % teknomunk has left teknomunk!~teknomunk@ubuntubob.residential.okstate.edu % mire has joined #parrot kid51++ % kid51 has left kid51!~jkeen@toronto-hs-216-138-231-37.s-ip.magma.ca % teknomunk has joined #parrot that's weird. blocktype("sub") in NQP's Actions.pir i thought only "immediate" and "declaration" were allowed. or valid, at least % teknomunk has left teknomunk!~teknomunk@ubuntubob.residential.okstate.edu % teknomunk has joined #parrot r26568 | kjs++ | trunk: : [nqp]bootstrap/actions.pm : fix for-loop diff: http://parrotvm.org/svn/parrot/revision/?rev=26568 woohoo!! npq's bootstrapped version is running pretty nicely :-) Nice work! I think I just compiled Squaak's action file with nqp, implemented in nqp * Coke wonders how this boostrap works. except that it doesn't work yet.. oh well. ... nice timing. oh not sure if it's actually a bootstrap... ehm the NQP actions file, Actions.pir, now has an actions file written in NQP so the code generator of the NQP compiler is written in NQP. ... and how do you run that? with the non-bootstrapped version that's written in pir? it results in a .pbc file in the end so that can be run by parrot yes, but it can't be turtles all the way down. so instead of running parrot nqp.pbc, I now run parrot bootstrap/nqp.pbc which uses the same parser but a different actions file, namely one written in NQP. % slightlyoff has left slightlyoff!~slightlyo@204.14.154.209 * particl1 pats his turtle's shell minor nit... i prefer one [] for all tags in a commit message eg: [nqp bootstrap] over [nqp][bootstrap] ok i'd love to see one nqp actions file as canon, with a script generating the other yeah. I'm a bit confused now. maybe something that uncomments all comments starting with '## ', and comments all lines without /^#/ 'cept blanks, of course and a full regression suite to make sure both behave the same you mean some kind of comment flipper? yep so the .pir file can be used to generate the .pm good idea. I'm not inspecting the generated code of both versions. They're similar, but somehwat different some :viviself stuff seems to be different that's a slippery slope. a test suite that runs pir vs pm would be nice Coke: what time is the call today, edt time? particl1: I do NOT prefer a single [foo bar] over [foo][bar]. Makes it easier to find your tags for foo or bar. I admit I still don't understand how the bootstrap is not running PIR. =-) /\[.*\bfoo\b.*\]/ that regex works for either style Coke: I'm confused myself :-S So, what happens is, the Actions file for the current NQP compiler is reimplemented using NQP Then the style we use doesn't matter, does it? ][ hurts my eyes. ymmv If you open that file, you'll see the NQP equivalent of the cuurrent implementation. What I did was flip the comments, use the NQP version (fix it here and there) and comment the PIR version then that NQP file is compiled by the current NQP compiler so this is like the second stage of the gcc from-scratch compilation process? and after adding a new main file for the new version which loads this NQP-generated PIR actions file i don't know gcc compilation process ... the new nqp is generated you use some other compiler to build gcc from source. (phase 1) you then use that built version of gcc to build gcc from source. kj: "then that NQP file is compiled by the current NQP compiler" -- that's where the pir version is used that's the bootstrap part right so, you build a c compiler using assembly. then using that version, you compile a c compielr written in C, which you compile with the assembly-version we could use nqp to build parrot after miniparrot. wanna try :) eh, parrot is not written in nqp... what do you mean ? :-) instead of using perl 5 ah nice SoC project ;-) can't wait to build nqp later today. i'd do it now, but i need the power for $work Coke: so ... we'll use parrot to compile the c99 compiler and then use *that* to compile parrot? :) okay... i need to profile some mod_perl code. any favorite modules i should look at? ah I see what's wrong, I think. I just forgot a whole action method. woops. make -j test # on perl-5.10.0 is a huge time saver can someone with privs on feather upgrade ack to svn-latest? you could build your own. those with privs include juerd, timtoady, moritz, diakopter... don't know any others or put it in your ~/bin :-) % mire has left mire!~Frodo@37-174-222-85.adsl.verat.net * particl1 tempts fate with make -j install ... I know I could have my own. But thanks. =-) hey, i pinged those involved. that's what counts % rdice has joined #parrot % Theory has joined #parrot anybody seen tewk lately? % Auzon has left Auzon!~ak@far2789.urh.uiuc.edu seen tewk? tewk was last seen on #parrot 5 days and 21 hours ago, saying: But I'd be open to other core hacking ideas that need to get done this summer. Particle doesn't seem to be around right now. [Mar 20 10:06:47 2008] Didn't we have a ticket at one point to eliminate the configure tests from "make test" ? purl, 46+755+96 897 i'm not sure if we had a ticket. we certainly had sentiment. ping coke I can't find coke in the DNS. hey there tewk tewk: 10:32 < particl1> anybody seen tewk lately? I got your email. I've been busy. I'm going to make some changes to the proposal today. I'll ping you when they are ready. excellent. thanks. how's the family? Busy, but fun. Does the jit of nci on x86 work? I saw some minimal code but don't know if it is used, I'm guessing not. Coke: where's a tgz of awk svn-latest ack I mean :) tewk: i'm not sure. what's the best way to check? bulid jitted parrot and test... what? How serious are people about using llvm for parrot jit? diakopter: search for App::Ack on cpan should be 1.78 I'll test the nci jit and see if it works at all, I was just seeing if anyone had any first hand knowledge. svn export http://ack.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/ ack that works too Coke: ping Coke: I installed it to /usr/local/bin no wtf? no no no no? ack-standalone GET http://ack.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/ack-standalone > ack ok... /usr/bin/ack -v dies atm. * Coke waits. in my defense, i expected diakopter would build/test/install ack after exporting the repo :) % cognominal has joined #parrot ah Coke: try now? 1;1 root@feather:~# ack --version ack 1.78_01 ack --version -bash: /usr/local/bin/ack: No such file or directory $ which ack /usr/bin/ack heh where do you want it? /usr/local/bin or /usr/bin this means i can't just type "ack". I'm not *running* /usr/local/bin/ack; I'm running "ack", and which ack tells me that is /usr/bin/ack. but /usr/bin/ack seems to work. so, I'm confused. restart the shell? I don't know why it's still looking for the (removed) /usr/bin/local/ack I mean /usr/local/bin/ack ah. "hash -r" what the (*&#$ is the point of 'which' if the shell is going to lie about it? =-) diakopter++ unless you had an alias set up or something % Theory has left Theory!~Theory@c-24-21-175-208.hsd1.mn.comcast.net I'd also like to recommend: ACK_PAGER='less -R -m -N' wuzzat do? less? i heard less was more. :) ok... man says it allows color output, includes line numbers, and prompts with % through file Just try it. GO ON MAN JUST TRY IT * particl1 wonders if his win32 port of less supports that course, it won't support -R % uniejo has left uniejo!~uniejo@langebro.adapt.dk * Coke tries it and fails to like it. waaaaah is there ack --pager? yes of course. Indubitably. how do you override the pager setting? The way that logically makes sense. The least surprising way. --nopager We've discussed this in the past: your logic and my logic don't seem to mesh. =-) % peeps[work] has joined #parrot Running this through a pager for some searches seems to make it take forever to display output (either with ACK_PAGER or even |cat). meh. yeah, I'm thinking it needs to unbuffer output. I need a test that verfiies that ack --help shows all the commands possible. so I can't forget to leave off --pager next time. Like I did this time. * Coke wonders if it is unsurprisingly logical that ack --v really means ack -v -> #ack PLEASE KEEP THE CHANNELS PURE please don't shout. ALSO DON'T SHOUT % Coke is now known as Coke_offline Infinoid: to answer your question, that became and is still a casualty of priorities and attention. is your work in progress available somewhere? I might take it and run with it, it's an interesting project :) * particl1 goes offline to look for lunch & (nqp "bootstrap") I really prefer that we use the term "self-hosting" as opposed to "bootstrap" here "bootstrap" implies that we're throwing away the PIR translation... and I'm not sure I'm ready to do that yet in particular, even though the nqp-version of actions may be semantically equivalent to the pir version, it also may have a lot of overhead that is best avoided until we get some optimizations in place otoh, if there's a strong sentiment that PIR is such a horrible evil that we need to be bootstrapping everything to excise it, then we can talk % particl1 has left particl1!~JGay@32.136.214.47 I am unaware of such a sentiment. -> oh, I know it exists lots of people seem to be in a rush to move things off of PIR asap crazy people. crazy people are the ones who flew planes into buildings or destructors I have the feeling that once enough perl6 will be implemented, self-hosting will be a big win feature wise cognominal: sure ... but we're not there yet :) cognominal: why? pm: because we can do more with less and it's all perl 6 (IMHO) pm: btw, welcome back : ) also, it is a good thing that people see "real" code written in Perl 6 * PerlJam rubs the vanishing cream off of his nose ... :-) pmichaud, parrotwise (versus pct), what is still missing to support perl6? when we say "self-hosting"... what part/feature of self-hosting is the big win? does "self-hosting" mean that _all_ of Rakudo is written in Perl 6? Infinoid: when I said I was working on it, I meant working on it *in my mind*! ;) ooo * Infinoid does an svn checkout of diakopter's mind cognominal: I can't think of any major features off the top of my head that are missing. concurrency/threading are probably bubbling up, but we're a ways from needing that I did update the botnix instance on feather to the latest svn right, I'll figure out botnix and see what I can come up with, thanks :) there are still some issues with lexical handling that need to be fleshed out (or worked around) pmichaud, how hard it is to get pct hll namespace aware? it's going to be a bit of work need to refactor protoobject handling for now it's just easier to work in the parrot hll namespace I tried naively to make it stick .HLL "perl6" "" in the beginning of the pir code but I get strange messages right, adding .HLL "perl6" means that the PAST protoobjects can't be located because they're in the parrot hll namespace while the action methods are running in the perl6 hll namespace % Theory has joined #parrot so, we also need to import those protoobjects into the perl6 namespace PCT should probably provide a helper method to do that there is an export_to described in the namespace ppd I think that export_to is a bit out of date I'm not even sure it's implemented yet part of it if I trust the tests I've also commented in the past that I think those deserve a redesign, since that pdd was created before we had the PMCMETHOD capabilities now that we have PMCMETHODS, we can make a much saner interface (sorry, PCCMETHOD. or something like that) with Perl6 having its onw namespace, the Hash class and the Hash pmc will not collide anymore? they will still collide because class namespaces are separate from the hll namespaces that's another bug that Parrot needs to address % gryphon has joined #parrot but we can work around that by introducing a Perl6Hash class it seems there is long and short names, but I don't understand how it works. I think that's only because we haven't thrown away the class registry yet. the trick to figuring out how Rakudo (and PCT and NQP) works is to remember that they tend to avoid Parrot classes altogether at least for names If we can get PMC class lookups all going via namespaces just the same as we have PIR class ones doing, I guess that problem goes away. instead everything happens via their protoobjects now, I am not running blind in the walls. I am able to see what are the problems. not yet to fix them. so there's nothing preventing Rakudo from having a 'Hash' protoobject, that is an instance of Perl6Hash but appears as 'Hash' in every other respect Though it means if you want a Parrot PMC, like 'Hash', you'd have to make sure you looked in the parrot namespace for it. Which is messier. in Rakudo? No, we'd have a Parrot::Hash protoobject that gives us an instance of the Parrot PMC or otherwise maps correctly to the PMC Hash as opposed to the Perl6 Hash oops, I misread jonathan's comment. You're correct, jonathan having all PMC class lookups via namespaces make things like $P0 = new 'Integer' a lot more tricky Right. which is also why the protoobject approach makes a _lot_ of sense :-) okay, pmichaud. And we don't have any way, in the key syntax, to distinguish between lookups from HLL root and real root. Right. But that's where doing things like exporting/importing can give us a win Yup. for example, if we have a way to import the PMC classname into a HLL namespace, then we don't have to worry about looking things up directly in the parrot hll namespace Right. and we can say that $P0 = new 'Integer' always refers to 'Integer' in the HLL, and never to Parrot's Integer (unless it's been mapped that way) That would make a lot of sense. but protoobjects give us much the same capabilities, at the cost of an extra step thus $P0 = get_hll_global 'Integer'; $P0 = $P0.new(); Well, we need protoobjects for Perl 6 stuff anyway. of course, the advantage to the $P0.new() approach is that we can also send initialization information to the object at the same time we create it anyway, I need lunch. bbiaw Yup, got Spanish lesson here too. bbl adios hasta lluegos (or something like that) one ell and no ess % Theory has left Theory!~Theory@c-24-21-175-208.hsd1.or.comcast.net % ruz has left ruz!~cubic@85.112.113.222 % sjansen has joined #parrot % kid51 has joined #parrot % jjore is now known as zz_jjore % zz_jjore is now known as jjore % particl1 has joined #parrot hi from nypl % kj has left kj!~IceChat7@ip565fd420.direct-adsl.nl So what exactly are you up to in Gotham? wife has a conference i'm tagging along for a scenery change Well, I'd arrange an emergency social meeting of ny.pm for you, but as you know, I'm out of the country. too bad i didn't consider organizing an emergency social ny.pm meeting yep, i see you're in the 51st state You could always email dha. When jmcadams was here he got a meeting on one day's notice. Benefit of meeting (besides beer): It would mean someone besides me could advocate for Parrot in NYC. yeah. my nights are already double-booked, though i have two dinners tonight You'll have to hit the gym tomorrow, then. good idea particl1: Good Idea: Whistling while you work. Bad Idea: Whistling while you eat. grr can't get the free wifi to work at the library % Coke_offline is now known as Coke % ruz has joined #parrot % Theory has joined #parrot particl1: I would suggest posting a blog entry on parrotblog regarding SOC % Theory has left Theory!~Theory@c-24-21-175-208.hsd1.mn.comcast.net advertising? Contempt, rather than celebration, is the proper response to advertising and the system that makes it possible. % Theory has joined #parrot yes, in re: ambs recent email. I can then put a pointer to that up on pc.o % Theory has left Theory!~Theory@c-24-21-175-208.hsd1.mn.comcast.net % kid51 has left kid51!~jkeen@toronto-hs-216-138-231-37.s-ip.magma.ca yeah, i should blog about it. i'll try to get to it in a few hours particl1: Made a couple of minor changes to SoC application. % spez has joined #parrot tewk: i'll take a look today, thanks! % spez has left #parrot % darbelo has joined #parrot % darbelo has left darbelo!~darbelo@190.3.134.31 % darbelo has joined #parrot pmichaud: regarding my email, I think this heads to a discussion that we need to have before 1.0: "what should be a opcode/runtime library/method/pmc/..." there's a lot of code scattered that could use a global organizational pass. do we need to have "concatenate" vtable entries, e.g. instead of just having that be a method? only aggregates get shift/unshift and possibly only list-like aggregates this should be implemented by pmroles particl1: eventually, sure. now everyone has them. "everyone has them" - what? every pmc has several unshift_ VTABLE variants. grep unshift src/vtable.tbl sorry, ack. =-) ah. i'd better check the vtable pdd that's pdd17, right? yep, consolidated into pdd17 r26569 | pmichaud++ | trunk: : [past-pm]: : * Remove deprecated past-pm from the "compilers" section of Parrot docs. diff: http://parrotvm.org/svn/parrot/revision/?rev=26569 % kid51 has joined #parrot particle ping or particl1 ping * Coke sees he was not fast enough in redirecting that thread back onto RT. pong The problem we're having on feather with the two postconfigure tests -- that's part of a general problem we're having when we try to require Parrot::Revision during testing. At least that's my diagnosis. 'cause when I try to run perl Configure.pl --test on feather for the very first time, I get the hang at t/configure/018-revision.t. this used to Just Work before you refactored to make it more testable i'm not blaming, just noticing But the code wasn't being tested at all then. So it only Just Worked because it wasn't being tickled at all, except during Configure.pl itself. I think the underlying problem is that we've agreed to support 3 different version control clients. And that Parrot::Revision is mandated to work one way before configuration and a different way after. i don't see that as a problem Yes, I know, but it's proven to be a maintenance nightmare. i use three version control clients at $work people are currently using 4 version control clients: svn, svk, git-svn, and git (without git-svn) I fixed some stuff related to git-without-svn last week... seems someone's put up a public git mirror at repo.or.cz if the tests are the only thing tickling the code.... it is indeed difficult to support. however, if someone is able to set up envs to test these, with smokes, then we're getting somewhere I have renounced using svk for parrot weeks ago I use svn Honestly, I think saying "svn is what we support, you can roll your own elsewise" is not a terrible position. in which case most of this support nightmare goes away. s/nightmare/slight issue/ Coke++ any reason why we don't do a check for the existence of $HOME/.svk before running svk? that'd sidestep the process-prompting-for-input issue ... but I know people would scream if we did that. I wouldn't scream :) Infinoid: That seems reasonable, so it'll never work. =-) * Coke 's passport shows up. I use svn... git is really nice for offline work (better than svk, in my opinion), but not worth the hassle of figuring it out just because you have svk installed doesn't mean you're using it. it's a pita, for sure agreed 110% % ruoso has left ruoso!~ruoso@195.23.92.2 I think I know how to fix up the svk stuff. it won't be perfect, but combined with a "use other SCMs at your own risk" blurb somewhere, I think it'll be allright does svk always go into $HOME/.svk ? I can check the svk sources to verify that way I see it, there are 4 cases. 1: svk isn't installed. 2: svk is installed but never used, this is the case where svk hangs. 3: svk is installed and used but doesn't know about the current repo. 4: svk is installed, used, and knows our version, grab the version in this case I'm hoping "used" is as simple as ".svk exists in the current user's home directory" the two main questions are: "am i in a working copy?" and "what vc tool am i using?" right. those are easy to answer for everything except svk particl1: Where 'working copy' is the opposite of working from, say, a release tarball -- correct? isn't there a depotmap somewhere (or whatever it's called) kid51: working copy is somewhere you can perform vc commands so, not tarball or svn export the "DEVELOPING" file doesn't exist in release tarballs, right? how about daily snapshot tarballs? Infinoid: Correct on the release tarballs * kid51 knows nothing about daily snapshot tarballs DEVELOPING is missing from releases only * Infinoid checks DEVELOPING exists in snapshots :( That's a PITA: YA variation to be maintained. it's okay to say "i don't know what revision this is" and set it to zero. I already account for the presence/absence of DEVELOPING in the tests I've written for Parrot::Revision. yes. as long as you use that only to determine whether it's a release tarball vs anything else that's fine disambiguating snapshots from svk checkouts basically requires checking ~/.svk "kid51" at 216.138.231.37 pasted "Parrot::Revision: excerpt handling SVK" (20 lines) at http://nopaste.snit.ch/12577 Um... does the version test check for svn first? if so, why am I failing that and checking svk? % chromatic has joined #parrot I think you're all asking the wrong question. The right question is "Why do we need to know which VCS someone is using?" % barney has joined #parrot some tests, like metadata what is the test testing? so, if i tcan't determine which vcs, it should just fail svn:keywords etc "why do we even have this lever." svn:keywords are checked, I believe by Parrot::Distribution, to determine what should be updated in MANIFEST % Psyche^ has joined #parrot basically, if we can determine that you're a developer, we can run the development tests if -e 'DEVELOPING' NO "why not" i heard "why not" was never sufficient justification. i could be a user that exports HEAD from svn developers don't always have a working copy. then i get DEVELOPING snapshots have a DEVELOPING, but how many people here use snapshot tarballs for development? so why are we running developer tests without being told to? Plus I might not WANT to do developer tests. why don't we, by default, just run feature tests. another goal is to figure out what revision a build was built from (and we need to know which VCS, to determine which command to run for that). All this is worth the faffing about trying to detect the VCS from all the potentially installed VCSes now and forever is active for the current checkout but which won't cause smokes to fail? I'd say it's worth checking the easily checkable cases, at least I'd say it's not, given how much time we've spent trying to get even the easy case right. =-) at the moment, parrot is optimized for developers for very small values of optimized. =-) developers are the common case. :) at some point, probably nearer to 0.99, this will change Okay, let me ask a different question. Do the SVN metadata tests tell us anything interesting when they fail? I don't think running the codingstd tests every day is "optimized for developers". Nor the config tests. nor ... It's certainly not optimized for maintenance developers ;-) It's optimized for developers in the sense that anyone with a commit bit who wants to add a feature more or less can. i'd be very happy not to run the config tests if i'm not modifing config Witness: recent addition of two new config steps without prior discussion. ...and not to run the codingstd/distro/etc tests if i'm not creating a distro % Patterner has left Patterner!~Psyche@e177112133.adsl.alicedsl.de % Psyche^ is now known as Patterner