Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

[PATCH] PIR updates

5 views
Skip to first unread message

Klaas-Jan Stol

unread,
Feb 1, 2007, 5:12:28 PM2/1/07
to perl6-i...@perl.org
hi,

attached a patch for languages/PIR.

I came across some exotic PIR syntax in IMCC. I've never seen some of
these being used, but as long as they're part of IMCC, I guess I should
support those in languages/PIR...

* added '.pcc_sub'
* added 'object' as type
* fixed rule key according to IMCC.y (',' and ';')
* added ".." for keys, now supporting x[1 .. 2], x[.. 2], x[1 ..] (did
anybody ever use this?)
* added "->" as separator for invocant and method
* added some more tests
* add an initial ROADMAP document

PIRupdate020107.patch

Klaas-Jan Stol

unread,
Feb 3, 2007, 10:53:39 AM2/3/07
to perl6-i...@perl.org
hi,

attached a patch for languages/PIR, fixing:

* changed tabs to spaces in pir.pg, and trimmed all trailing spaced
(this might look better on linux? not sure)
* minor changes in pir.pg
* added a docs directory
* added pirgrammar.pod file, a human-readable version (with some
changes) of pir.pg
This file may, in the end, be the basis for PDD19: PIR, if that's
desirable. Because this file is easier to read, it might also serve
newcomers to PIR in order to learn about its syntax. Furthermore, some
current features of IMCC might be discussed whether to remove them or
not (clean up PIR grammar; now's the chance, after a 1.0 release it's fixed)
* HTML version of pirgrammar.pod: pirgrammar.html
* added a few more tests.

When I made the patch, *again* it contained the contents of the new
files twice. I manually removed the double contents from the patch file.

regards,
klaas-jan

PIRupdate020307.patch

Bernhard Schmalhofer

unread,
Feb 4, 2007, 8:46:03 AM2/4/07
to Klaas-Jan Stol, perl6-i...@perl.org
Klaas-Jan Stol schrieb:
>
> attached a patch for languages/PIR, fixing:
Thanks, applied in r16892.

>
> When I made the patch, *again* it contained the contents of the new
> files twice. I manually removed the double contents from the patch file.
Yes, this time the patch applied without any hassle.

Thanks,
Bernhard

0 new messages