|
00:23
[Coke] left
00:24
[Coke] joined
|
|||
| timo | the bane of my existence: "value has been optimized out" | 00:47 | |
| gist.github.com/timo/340a02f49638b...aedaf98cc2 random output from "moar timeline 1000" and a `moar bt` with details (arguments and such) from a random spot inside there | 01:17 | ||
| japhb | Woah. That's pretty cool! | 03:06 | |
| Voldenet | that's neat, very detailed | 03:16 | |
|
08:44
nine joined
08:45
nine left
09:22
finanalyst joined
10:00
sp1983 joined
10:04
sp1983 left
10:05
Sp1983_ joined
10:07
Sp1983_ left
10:11
El_Che joined
|
|||
| El_Che | a problem building moarvm: | 10:11 | |
| git checkout --recurse-submodules 2026.07 ; fatal: not a git repository: ../../.git/modules/3rdparty/ryu ; fatal: could not reset submodule index | |||
| it's a fresh download/build in a container, no trailing files | 10:12 | ||
|
10:41
finanalyst left
10:48
nine joined
11:17
nine left
11:58
nine joined
|
|||
| [Coke] | That shouldn't have landed until post release, no? | 12:35 | |
| was this resolved in #raku? | 12:42 | ||
| El_Che | I did a workaround | 12:43 | |
| the submodule is dirty because probably a sunmodule was deleted between the release tag en head | |||
| [Coke] | OK. If I did something wrong and we can figure it out, we'll get it into the release guide for moar. | 12:45 | |
| I do have a step where I clean up the submodules explicitly because I have had a dirty checkout in the past. | |||
| (but that's to avoid committing any changes on the release branch) | 12:46 | ||
| (changes to submodules, I mean) | |||
| El_Che | I don't think it's wrong, per se. It that my way cloning+checkout-to-tag strubbles with it when the submodules are "dirty" | 12:47 | |
| just changed it a little to deal with that | |||
| ab5tract | m: Q|sub infix:<darling>($x,$y --> Bool) { return $x and $y }; 1 !darling 0 ==> say()|.AST.EVAL | 12:50 | |
| camelia | ===SORRY!=== Error while compiling EVAL_0 Cannot negate darling because default-infix operators are not iffy enough at EVAL_0:1 |
||
| ab5tract | I think we can pretty easily make that work via RakuAST, right? I guess it doesn't matter to fix unless iffy and diffy can coexist, though. | 12:51 | |
| m: sub infix:<darling>($x,$y) is equiv(&infix:<eq>) { return $x and $y }; 1 !darling 0 ==> say() | 12:52 | ||
| camelia | False | ||
| ab5tract | but shouldn't that be True? (and please ignore my extraneous return statements .. 😅 | 12:53 | |
| [Coke] | github.com/MoarVM/MoarVM/blob/main...lain=1#L33 | 13:00 | |
| (... wow, the clone of moarvm on my irc box was on master still) | |||
| ab5tract | the past is ever with us :) | 13:03 | |
| m: sub infix:<darling>($x,$y) is equiv(&infix:<eq>) { $x and $y }; 1 !darling 0 ==> say(); [&&] True Zdarling False ==> say(); [darling] (True, False) xx 2 ==> say() | |||
| camelia | ===SORRY!=== Error while compiling <tmp> Cannot reduce with darling because chaining operators are diffy and not chaining at <tmp>:1 ------> ); [&&] True Zdarling False ==> say(); [<HERE>darling] (True, False) xx 2 ==> say() expecting any … |
||
|
13:22
nine left
13:33
nine joined
13:37
nine left,
nine joined
13:46
thundergnat joined
14:07
thundergnat left
|
|||
| [Coke] | whoops, left the blin/release box on post-release. | 14:26 | |
|
15:36
El_Che left
15:37
apogee_ntv left
15:38
apogee_ntv joined
|
|||
| [Coke] | ... ok with multiple heavy months of blin usage, releases, etc., time to ditch azure and get a standalone linux box for this. :| | 16:46 | |
|
19:24
finanalyst joined
|
|||
| [Coke] | Ordered. Blah. | 20:22 | |
| japhb | Specs, out of curiosity? | 20:31 | |
| [Coke] | 32G mem, 1TB disk, mini form factor, intel core i9/14 | 20:42 | |
| dual boot linux/win | |||
| Can throw it under my monitor stand and remote into it. | 20:43 | ||
|
20:56
Geth left
20:57
Geth joined
|
|||
| Geth | rakudo/main: 96c7630c32 | (Elizabeth Mattijsen)++ | src/core.c/RakuAST/LegacyPodify.rakumod RakuAST: allow for empty =comment/code/data/input/output Spotted by Marcel Timmerman, raised by Richard Hainsworth |
20:57 | |
| [Coke] | lizmat: is github.com/Raku/geth/issues the current repo for Geth? | 21:17 | |
| looks like it had a commit a month ago, so *guessing* yes | |||
| question: if our default branch is main in a repo, can/should we remove the old master? | 21:29 | ||
| I would vote should. (e.g. on raku/nqp) | |||
|
22:10
finanalyst left
|
|||