| IRC logs at
Set by AlexDaniel on 12 June 2018.
00:25 redable left, ggoebel left 00:28 lucasb left 00:40 redable joined, redable left 01:46 ggoebel joined 03:19 ZzZombo joined 07:08 sena_kun joined 11:05 sena_kun left 11:21 sena_kun joined 11:23 sena_kun left 12:59 lucasb joined 13:33 Kaeipi left 15:22 redable joined 15:33 redable left 15:57 domidumont joined 16:18 sena_kun joined
AlexDaniel Geth: hello? 16:41
16:55 redable joined 17:36 redable left 17:38 domidumont left 17:39 redable joined 18:40 redable left 19:07 vesper11 joined 19:09 vesper left 19:21 Geth_ joined, Geth left 19:24 redable joined 19:35 sena_kun left 19:58 domidumont joined 20:02 redable left 20:04 domidumont left 20:31 domidumont joined 20:35 domidumont left
jnthn timotimo++ # nice blog post and work :) 21:32
timotimo thank you! \o/
vrurg jnthn: BTW, I finally done M#1209 the way it had to be. It is ready for merge. 21:48
synopsebot M#1209 [open]: Fix run-away CORE context on closures
vrurg timotimo: I described the problem in the PR. Nothing really specific, the biggest problem was my lack of expertise in moar. :) 21:49
Geth_ MoarVM/master: 4 commits pushed by (Vadim Belman)++, (Jonathan Worthington)++ 21:55
vrurg jnthn: thanks! 22:00
jnthn vrurg++
timotimo super good! 22:05
so 23:01
when a callback comes from a thread moarvm knows nothing about
how are we going to figure out which MVMInstance it should belong to? 23:02
since we kind of have support for multiple MVMInstances in one process
jnthn I'm not sure there's any good way to solve that.
timotimo nqp::claimprocess()
jnthn Right, you'd have to designate one instance 23:03
In terms of how people use MoarVM today, I don't think that's going to be a practical problem 23:04
timotimo indeed
23:39 Kaiepi joined 23:48 lucasb left