develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from July 2016

Re: merging optimising sub signature work so far

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Father Chrysostomos
Date:
July 25, 2016 23:09
Subject:
Re: merging optimising sub signature work so far
Message ID:
20160725230946.5141.qmail@lists-nntp.develooper.com
Dave Mitchell wrote:
> I think it would be awkward if we we were both working on sig code at the
> same time. Perhaps I should do the \@y work? Is this agreed upon syntax?
> It there a thread I can peruse for the details?
> I assume its just a case of the parser flagging an OP_ARGELEM
> (with OPf_REF perhaps), and then for pp_argelem to store SvRV(rhs)
> in the pad slot, while croaking if the RHS isn't of the right type?

The ticket is #128242, but it is not very focused and has loose ends.

I had already implemented it before reading this.  I have just pushed
the sprout/sigwack branch.  It only implements the agreed-upon behav-
iour, which allows only refs for the arguments.  The other sugges-
tions, which were not really agreed upon, I have left undone.

I do not mind resolving conflicts after you merge your first sig
branch into blead.  But if you want to do it instead (or rewrite it),
that is fine.


Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About