Does the naming and placement of this test fit convention?
The opcode is called 'spawnw'
The function is 'Parrot_Run_OS_Command'
The file 'config/gen/platform/*/exec.c'
A little guidance would help occasionally.
If it were forthcoming, I would try to write them up into a beginners FAQ.
If this patch is no good, would someone point out what is wrong with it, or
where in the documentation I should be looking for this guidance?
If my lack of experience with OSS/unix makes my willingness to contribute to the
project unviable, then a simple statement; "stop bothering us" will stop me
wasting your time and mine.
If I may, most of the US East Coast is settling down for bed right now,
and most of the West Coast is having dinner. I would guess that people
just haven't noticed your post yet.
The patch looks okay to me, but I've been out of the loop so long that
I'm as likely to be wrong as right. :^)
In my experience, these guys don't discriminate based on either Unix
experience or open-source experience--when I submitted my first patches,
I'd never sat at a Unix workstation or server, submitted code to another
Open Source project, or even written C. (C++, yes, but not C.)
--
Brent "Dax" Royal-Gordon <br...@brentdax.com>
Perl and Parrot hacker
Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.
> Does the naming and placement of this test fit convention?
Your are talking of a new test file called t/pmc/exec.t, don't you?
Good. I'd prefer t/op/exec.t, as it isn't really PMC related.
Where is the test?
leo
And most of Europe's long-asleep. (Which is important, as that's
where Leo is :)
The patch looks fine, and I expect someone'll put it in--I will
unless someone beats me to it.
--
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
d...@sidhe.org have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk