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

Re: merging optimising sub signature work so far

Thread Previous | Thread Next
Dave Mitchell
August 1, 2016 12:02
Re: merging optimising sub signature work so far
Message ID:
On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 11:09:46PM -0000, Father Chrysostomos wrote:
> 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.

I've just pushed smoke-me/davem/sub_argsB4, which is sub_argsB3 with
extra commits that should address the issues you raised in this thread.
Once that's merged, I'll review your sigwack branch and merge/modify it as

Spock (or Data) is fired from his high-ranking position for not being able
to understand the most basic nuances of about one in three sentences that
anyone says to him.
    -- Things That Never Happen in "Star Trek" #19

Thread Previous | Thread Next Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About