Pike-devel December 2002

pike-devel@lists.lysator.liu.se

5 participants
68 discussions

Pike in Gentoo
by M�rten Woxberg (Farligt med fest) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 23 Dec '02

23 Dec '02

Hi, text in english since Pike developers forum seems to use that language. I tried to do my first from scratch ebuild.. haven't tried it at all but I thought you might :) Not even sure it works :) but it's a start for someone more experienced in python and Gentoo ------------------------pike-7.4.10.ebuild------------------------- # Distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License v2 S="${WORKDIR}/pike-${PV}" HOMEPAGE="http://pike.ida.liu.se" DESCRIPTION="Pike programming language and runtime" SRC_URI="ftp://pike.ida.liu.se/pub/pike/latest-stable/Pike-v${PV}.tar.gz" LICENSE="GPL, LGPL" KEYWORDS="x86 ppc" SLOT="7.4" src_compile() { emake || die make so || die } src_install () { make \ INSTALL_BIN=${D}/usr/bin \ INSTALL_MAN=${D}/usr/share/man/man1 \ INSTALL_LIB=${D}/usr/lib/ install || die } -----------------------------------------

2 4

Pike in Gentoo
by Ian D (cute in a stupid-ass way) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 23 Dec '02

23 Dec '02

Uh, I'm just wrong here. It's not finding any Makefile because the directory is named differently. I mentioned this a way back when I was trying to build my own ebuild.

1 0

implicit lambda
by Martin Baehr 20 Dec '02

20 Dec '02

hi, from the release notes: Note that although useful, this feature has important disadvantages and will probably be obsoleted by a better alternative in the future. ... Another method that overcomes these problems will likely be implemented. The problem is that it can give compatibility problems to change old code that uses implicit lambdas to that one, since e.g. return will work differently without giving any sort of error. given these statements why was the opportunity not taken, to remove implicit lambda again before the 7.4 release. anybody using 7.3 should not be depending on stability, and may be expected to change code, but now that the cat is loose it will be much harder to catch. though i still think that the feature can be removed now, before 7.4 becomes widespread. what reasons would be against doing that? greetings, martin. -- interested in doing pike programming, sTeam/caudium/pike/roxen training, sTeam/caudium/roxen and/or unix system administration anywhere in the world. -- pike programmer working in europe csl-gmbh.net open-steam.org (www.archlab|(www|db).hb2).tuwien.ac.at unix bahai.or.at iaeste.(tuwien.ac|or).at systemadministrator (stuts|black.linux-m68k).org is.(schon.org|root.at) Martin Bähr http://www.iaeste.or.at/~mbaehr/

3 4

Pike 7.4
by Martin Nilsson (bygger parser ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 19 Dec '02

19 Dec '02

So, Pike 7.4.8 is now the RC2.

3 8

Pike 7.4
by Martin Nilsson (bygger parser ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 19 Dec '02

19 Dec '02

Or, you can take one from another tree and edit it to how you think it was... :)

1 0

Pike 7.4
by Martin Nilsson (bygger parser ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 19 Dec '02

19 Dec '02

Well then. ftp://pike.ida.liu.se/pub/pike/latest-stable now gives you Pike 7.4. The website is updated. Those building binaries may place them in the public ftp now.

2 3

Pike 7.4
by Martin Nilsson (bygger parser ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 19 Dec '02

19 Dec '02

Though, given that the condensed changelog is 35k, perhaps a link is enough. A condensed condensed changelog might be an idea.

1 0

val-tags
by Peter Bortas ＠ Pike developers forum 19 Dec '02

19 Dec '02

What function does CVSROOT/val-tags fill? I'm trying to check out the c7_4_10 tag but get: % cvs up -r v7_4_10 ..ter/hack/Pike/7.4 cvs [server aborted]: cannot write /pike/data/cvsroot/CVSROOT/val-tags: Permission denied

2 1

CHANGES
by Martin Nilsson (alldaglig sebra-mongo) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 19 Dec '02

19 Dec '02

The Changelog is pretty much done now. Unless someone one else wishes to delay Pike 7.4 I'll do a version bump and we'll build binary packages with Pike 7.4.6. If that works out all right for all essential platforms we'll make a release tomorrow. Mkay?

6 14

pike_frames vs. clone_object/destruct. (7.5)
by Per Hedbor () ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 18 Dec '02

18 Dec '02

I have added two new tests to pike -x benchmark, added the --tests='Glob here' argument to be above mentioned program to be able to run only the tests I want to, and then optimized cloning the null pike-class about 20%. Also, cloning a non-null pike class (one with a create method that actually does something and a local variable) is also faster. Before: test total user mem (runs) --------------------------------------------------------- Clone null-object.......... 0.502s 0.421s 2936kb (10) Clone object............... 0.800s 0.761s 2936kb (7) After: test total user mem (runs) --------------------------------------------------------- Clone null-object.......... 0.360s 0.326s 2948kb (14) Clone object............... 0.688s 0.651s 2948kb (8) On a related note, the same optimizations could rather easily be done to gc_check_object, gc_mark_object_as_referenced and real_gc_cycle_check_object. The key to the whole thing is that there were a lot of struct pike_frame:s created, initialized, linked and deinitialized unessearily, and this took quite a lot of time.

4 8

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

Pike-devel December 2002